Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER, in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

County of London Electric Supply Company Bill,

Lords Amendments to be considered this evening, at a quarter-past Eight of the clock.

Swansea Corporation Bill,

London and Home Counties Joint Electricity Authority (No. 2) Bill,

Lords Amendments considered, pursuant to the Order of the House of 22nd July, and agreed to.

Croydon Corporation Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered:

Ordered, That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be how read the Third time.—[The Chairman of ways and Means.]

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

East Anglian Electricity Bill (by Order),

Consideration of Lords Amendments deferred till this evening, at a quarter-past Eight of the clock.

Ayr Burgh (Water, etc.) Order Confirmation Bill,

Considered; read the Third time, and passed.

Oral Answers to Questions — VIENNA (DISTURBANCES).

Sir ROBERT THOMAS: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the recent disturbances in Vienna have resulted in loss of life or property to British subjects, either residents or tourists?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): There were no British subjects among the dead or wounded and no cases of damage to British property have been brought to my notice.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA.

NANKING ADMINISTRATION (LOAN).

Colonel DAY: 2.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the contemplated flotation of Treasury notes to the value of £7,500,000 by the Nanking Government, on the security of the salt revenue of the provinces of Kiangsu and Chekiang; and whether he can make a statement on the matter?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: On the 9th of July His Majesty's Minister reported that the Nanking Administration were proposing to raise a loan of $60,000,000 (£6,000,000) in Shanghai on the security of the salt surplus and that Mr. Hussey-Freke, the Associate Chief Inspector of the Salt Administration, was publishing in the Chinese Press a statement to the effect that such a loan would be a contravention of the Reorganisation Loan Agreement of 1913 and warning the public to have nothing to do with it.

Colonel DAY: Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Ministers of France and Japan met to discuss this matter, and whether they made any protest about this proposed loan?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN:: I have once again to plead that my memory does not allow me to retain the immediate possession of all the fats which at one time or another come to my notice. I do not think they have, but I would not like to answer definitely without notice.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any action has been taken or whether any information has been received from the Southern Finance Minister at Nanking?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I must ask for notice as to communications which passed. I cannot remember exactly.

BULLION SHIPMENTS.

Colonel DAY: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any information from the British representatives at Shanghai to the effect that the Customs at Shanghai, under the instructions from the Nanking Government, have refused permission to ship consignments of specie to other ports; and can he give full particulars?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for West Willesden (Mr. Viant) on the 21st of July.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his information shows that it is intended to place a virtual embargo on silver there?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The facts were stated by the Under-Secretary in a reply to which I ask the hon. Member to be good enough to refer.

NANKING OUTRAGE.

Mr. LOOKER: 5.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any claims have been lodged by consular and British officials whose property was lost or damaged in the Nanking outrage; if so, what is the amount of such claims; and in what manner is it proposed to deal with them?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The details of the claims have not yet been filed by the British officials whose property was destroyed or damaged in Nanking.

CUSTOMS DUTIES.

Mr. LOOKER: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the Government's attitude towards the proposed increases of the Chinese Customs duties?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: In addition to the consultations referred to in the reply given to my hon. Friend on the 13th instant, His Majesty's Minister has been in consultation with the British Chamber of Commerce at Shanghai. No decision can be arrived at until I have received the Chamber's views, which, His Majesty's Minister reports, have now been formulated.

MILITARY AND POLITICAL SITUATION.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has as to the present military and political situation in China?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: In the present chaotic state of affairs in China and the complicated intrigues that are apparently taking place between the leaders of the various factions, it is impossible to give a clear summary of the situation. I therefore confine my reply as far as possible to matters of fact. There has been no fighting of any importance since 6th July, when the last summary of the situation was given. On the northern front, it is reported that an armistice has been arranged between Chang Tsung-chang and Chiang Kai-shek: the latter's troops have entirely retired from Shantung and have in large numbers withdrawn to Chinkiang, whence they have proceeded up river.
On the western sector of the front the Fengtien troops have withdrawn to Paotingfu, and the Shansi troops of Yen Hsi-shan have entered Chihli, and are occupying the railway in the south of the province, thus inserting themselves between the Fengtien forces and those of Feng Yu-hsiang, who has advanced his troops across the Yellow River and appears to have occupied the whole of the north of Honan up to the Chihli border. On 18th June martial law was declared in Hankow; various strategical points were occupied by the 35th Army under General Ho Chien; Communists and labour agitators were arrested; the extremist members of the Wuhan administration resigned; and the various Russian "advisers" left for Kiu-kiang. The Government was completely reorganised on non-Communist lines. Borodin and other Russians have since returned to Hankow. Strong forces under Chang Fa-Kwei have proceeded down river to Kiukiang, and have thence gone southward to Nanchang. There are rumours of rapprochements between Nanking and the Wuhan administration, between the latter and Feng Yu-hsing, between Chang Tso-lin and Chiang Kai-shek, and various other combinations.

PASSPORTS AND VISAS.

Sir HARRY BRITTAIN: 4.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his Department is in touch with any foreign Government at the moment with regard to the elimination of the visa; and, if so, with which Government or Governments?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The only Government with which His Majesty's Government are at present in negotiation is the German Government.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Can my right hon. Friend say whether in the next few months he expects finality to that discussion?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not expect finality to any question.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Is it too much to ask for finality in this matter, seeing that the other people concerned have agreed to carry out this arrangement?

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is it not a fact that the German Government and the American Government have come to terms over this visa question?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have asked for notice as to what exact information is in my possession as to the doings of our own Government. I am even more entitled to ask for notice of questions as to what has passed between other Governments.

FINLAND (BRITISH INTERESTS).

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the action of the Finnish Government in still refusing to hand over the title deeds of certain forest property in which British capital is invested; and what action he proposes to take in this matter?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: My attention has been drawn to a statement to this effect, and I have requested His Majesty's Minister at Helsingfors to ascertain the position and, if necessary, to make suitable representations to the Finnish Government.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Is it not a fact that this delay is most detrimental to the British interests concerned, and have
not the Finnish Government gone back on the decision of their own Supreme Court?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have told my hon. Friend that a statement to that effect has been made to me, and I have told him also the instructions that have been issued to His Majesty's Minister.

ROYAL NAVY (LEAVE, HOME WATERS).

Sir BERTRAM FALLE: 16.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that one of the welfare committee's requests approved by the Admiralty allowed leave from a ship's home port, but that notwithstanding ships of the home service belonging to the Portsmouth division and with 65 per cent. of the ratings with homes in that district, grant leave from Portland; and if he will inquire into the matter so that this Admiralty privilege, which is greatly valued, may be carried out wherever possible?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of ADMIRALTY (Lieut.-Colonel Headlam): Leave to men serving in ships in home wavers is given whenever possible at the home ports to which the men belong. There are at Portland certain vessels which are permanently based on that port. As far as possible leave is given while these vessels are being refitted at their own home ports, but my hon. and gallant Friend will realise that it is not possible for all the leave to be given on these occasions and the balance has necessarily to be given from Portland.

TRADE BOARDS ACT.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 17.
asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the many instances of low wages which are now prevalent in the catering trade; and if he is prepared to conduct an inquiry into this trade with a view to inclusion under the Trade Boards Act?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): Since the publication last year of the Report upon conditions in the Light Refreshment and Dining Room (non-licensed) branch of the Catering Trade, no fresh facts have been brought to notice which would justify the institution of a new inquiry.

Mr. TAYLOR: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it was stated recently by the Chairman of the Licensed Victuallers' Defence Association, that 65 hours a week, exclusive of meal times, was considered quite proper in that trade? That has been stated in the last few months.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Would not the points referred to by the right hon. Gentleman be sufficient to justify him in proceeding forthwith to establish a trade board for this body of workpeople?

Mr. W. THORNE: Is it not the case that unless the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to carry out an inquiry of this kind, there is no possible chance of these people getting any advance in pay or reduction of hours; that the only alternative is to go out on strike, and that they can then be "pinched" under the Government's Bill, next week?

Mr. KELLY: In view of the unduly low wages paid to these workers, will the right hon. Gentleman not reconsider the whole position in regard to the catering trade?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is it not a fact that the people in this trade make their money out of the public and not out of their wages?

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the changed circumstances will the right hon. Gentleman not reconsider his decision of twelve months ago?

Mr. SPEAKER: This matter can be raised in the Debate to-day.

Mr. STEPHEN: 23.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of industries for which Trade Boards have been set up; and the number of men and women employés, respectively, in those industries?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Trade Boards have been set up in Great Britain and are in operation in 39 trades. No exact information is available as to the number of workpeople employed in these trades, but it is estimated that some 350,000 males and 922,600 females are so employed.

Mr. PALING: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many Trade Boards have been set up since the present Government came into office?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Not without notice.

Mr. STEPHEN: 24.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of prosecutions in Glasgow and Scotland, respectively, which have taken place of employers who have failed to observe the Regulations with regard to Trade Boards?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Since 1920, six prosecutions under the Trade Boards Acts have been taken in Glasgow, and nine in other parts of Scotland.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

BENEFIT DISALLOWED.

Mr. BARKER: 18.
asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that G. J. Lippitt, checkweigher, Oak Leigh, Aberbeeg, Mon., William John Waters, check-weigher, Commercial Road, Llanhilleth, Mon., and James Thomas, checkweigher, Havodrymis, Mon., were dismissed on the 30th April, 1926; that these men have never been re-employed since that date; that they have been refused unemployment insurance benefit from May to December, 1926; that these men were not in any way affected by the industrial dispute last year; and will he see that these cases are investigated and benefit paid to these insured persons?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am having inquiries made and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.

EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGES (GLASGOW AND ROCHDALE).

Mr. BUCHANAN: 19.
asked the Minister of Labour if he can state when it is proposed to proceed with the building of the new Employment Exchange for Central Glasgow?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: No, Sir. It has not yet been possible to find a suitable site for this building, but every effort is being made to find one.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Why did the Department dispose of the old site which was suitable for this purpose and why should they now be in the position of having to look for a site for a new Exchange?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If the hon. Member puts clown other questions on the subject, I will communicate with him in regard to the old site. As regards the new site, we have one in mind and are having inquiries made about it.

Mr. KELLY: 21.
asked the Minister of Labour what progress is being made in the erection of the new Employment Exchange at Rochdale; and if any date has been given for the completion of the new buildings?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Building operations have started and are expected to be completed in about 12 months.

Mr. KELLY: Why has it taken such a long time to complete this exchange?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I could not say without inquiry.

SHIPBUILDING TRADE.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 20.
asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons registered as unemployed throughout the country who are normally engaged as shipbuilding workers and the total number for the same period last year?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: At 20th June, 1927, the number of persons in Great Britain classified as belonging to the shipbuilding and ship-repairing industry and recorded as unemployed was 47,499, or 22.7 per cent. of the estimated number of insured persons in that industry, as compared with 88,152, of 39.5 per cent. at 21st June, 1926.

JUTE MILLS, DUNDEE (HOLIDAYS).

Mr. JOHNSTON: 25.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the workers engaged in two jute mills in Dundee ceased work on 22nd July, to resume on 2nd August; that these workers having drawn insurance benefit within the previous six weeks the Continuity Rule, U.I.L. 10, applied; and why these workers were asked to attend at the local Employment Exchange on Tuesday, 26th July, to sign the register, seeing that they were not entitled to any benefit during the period 23rd July to 30th July, these being the recognised customary holidays?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I will make inquiry and let the hon. Member know the result.

Mr. JOHNSTON: What conceivable reason can there be far a wanton and unnecessary instruction such as this?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I can only tell the hon. Member that, judging from the circumstances which he gives me, and which I must verify before giving a definite reply, it looks as if an instruction of this kind had been given in order to safeguard possible applicants themselves. By the continuity rule it is quite possible that they might be entitled to benefit for a single day after the holidays were over, or for two days after the holidays were over, If you have a period of less than three days unemployment after holidays, proof of being out of work during those holidays would have to be given; consequently, an instruction of that kind might be in the interests of the applicants themselves.

Mr. JOHNSTON: What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "proof of being out of work" during a period of recognised and customary holidays?

HON. MEMBERS: Answer!

Mr. JOHNSTON: In view of the urgency and public importance of this matter, I must press the right hon. Gentleman for an answer to my supplementary question.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The answer is quite plain. Under the Act, proof has to be given of part-time employment, and the fact that in certain trades holidays may or may not be customary, does not provide positive proof. I have said to the hon. Member that with regard to the particular case raised by him, it is clear I must inquire into the circumstances and verify the accuracy of the statements made before giving a definite answer. He asked me for a provisional answer, and I have given him what, on the face of it, seems to be the possible reason for such an instruction, if it was given.

INSURANCE BILL.

Mr. BUCHANAN: May I ask the Leader of the House if it is the intention of the Government that the Unemployment Insurance Bill, which is now going to be introduced, will be printed at an early date?

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: Is this the Bill that has reference to the conclusions of the Blanesburgh Report?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Churchill): I am informed that it will be printed and circulated in ample time to enable Members to take part in a Debate on the subject as soon as possible after we resume in November.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that large numbers of workmen are involved in this and that their conferences are held, at which decisions must be made, between now and the time we are meeting, and is it not possible that we may have it even earlier than the time promised by the right hon. Gentleman?

Mr. CHURCHILL: It must be left to the Government's judgment when it is possible for them to mature their proposals and to lay them before Parliament, but ample time will be given before the meeting of Parliament in the Autumn Session for Members to study and familiarise themselves with the details.

Mr. MAXTON: May we take it from that reply that the Bill is not yet drafted and that important decisions have yet to be taken by the Cabinet?

Mr. CHURCHILL: It is very unusual to ask questions or give information about the exact state of legislation which has not yet been presented. Every Government is entitled to prepare its legislation and to present it at the proper moment to the House, and that is exactly what we are going to do.

Mr. MAXTON: Since the Measure is actually being presented to-day, within two or three days of the conclusion of the Session, is it not usual for the text of a Bill to be in the hands of Members of the House?

Mr. CHURCHILL: We are presenting the Bill to-day for the express purpose of enabling it to be printed and circulated in the Recess, so that Members can have reasonable time to study it and its discussion can be begun as soon as we meet in the Autumn. We really cannot adopt a more correct procedure than that.

Mr. HARRIS: Are we to understand that this is only a dummy Bill?

Mr. WALLHEAD: The question of my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) was whether the Bill
will be published before the great meetings of the trade unions. This thing affects them very nearly. After all, the Government hope, I suppose, to get the Measure well received by the trade unions, and it would be advisable to present it in time for proper discussion to take place.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I think the House of Commons claims priority even over these important meetings.

WASHINGTON HOURS CONVENTION.

Mr. KELLY: 22.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he has satisfied himself, on investigation, as to whether the law on the basis of which other Governments have ratified the Hours Convention is or is not adequate; and, if the law is considered inadequate, whether he has made any representation to such Governments to the effect that, on the strength of such a law, His Majesty's Government would not feel entitled to ratify the Hours Convention?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: As I have from time to time explained to the House, one of the most serious obstacles in the way of ratification of the Washington Convention lies in the different interpretations which are placed upon a number of its provisions. The London Conference last year cleared up some of these differences, but in ray view further examination of the situation is necessary before a position satisfactory to this country can be reached. I would remind the hon. Member that the responsibility for seeing that the law in any given country is in accordance with a Convention that has been ratified rests with the Government of that country.

Mr. KELLY: Can the right hon. Gentleman name the countries where he considers the Convention is not being carried out?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: No, I certainly could not, in answer to a question.

Mr. PALING: Is it not the case that legislation passed by the Government has made it more difficult to adopt this Convention?

Mr. KELLY: Has the right hon. Gentleman any complaint to make, particularly with regard to Belgium?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If there were any complaint, from whatever quarter, raised in regard to Belgium, it would have to be raised under Part XIII of the Peace Treaty and laid in accordance with the provisions of that Part of the Treaty. It is precisely that kind of difficulty which makes me anxious that we should know our own position quite clearly and get other nations to come to agreement, before any Convention is entered into by us.

Mr. T. SHAW: Is it a fact, that in case a nation ratifies a Convention and has reason to believe that another nation which has also ratified that Convention is not carrying it out, the nation which has the allegation to make can lay it directly before the League of Nations and have it investigated?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The procedure, with which doubtless the right hon. Gentleman is familiar, is in accordance with Part XIII of the Peace Treaty. I am speaking off-hand, but, if I remember aright, while it provides in the first instance for a Commission of Inquiry appointed by the League of Nations, in the end the matter would have to be settled by the Permanent Court. I speak subject to correction.

Mr. SHAW: Is it a fact that, during a meeting between the Labour Ministers of several countries, the French Minister expressly stated that, in case a complaint were made against the administration in France of a Convention ratified by France, they understood that a case would he taken to the League of Nations for investigation?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I should certainly wish, before giving an answer to a point of that kind, to verify my references.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is not the real reason why the Government are prevented from putting this Convention into operation, the opposition of the "bosses" in this country?

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL AIR FORCE.

SCHNEIDER CUP RACE.

Colonel DAY: 26.
asked the Secretary of State for Air how many high-speed machines of the Supermarine-Napier and
Gloster-Napier types are being built; how many, including reserves, are to be sent to Venice for the Schneider Cup race; and whether a warship or aircraft carrier is to accompany the British Schneider Cup team?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Philip Sassoon): The answer to the first part of the question is that three of each of the types of aircraft mentioned are built or are being built for experimental work; to the second part, that three Supermarine and two Gloster machines together with a Short seaplane fitted with a Bristol engine will be sent to Venice to be tested out in the Schneider Cup race. As regards the last part, an aircraft carrier and four destroyers will visit Venice at the time of the race, and it has been arranged with the Admiralty that they shall give such assistance as may be possible to the British team.

Colonel DAY: Can the hon. Baronet say how long before the race the team will be allowed to go to Venice, so that they can practise over the course?

Sir P. SASSOON: I think about a week.

TECHNICAL OFFICERS (CONDITIONS OF ESTABLISHMENT).

Mr. E. BROWN: 27.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that an ex-service man employed as a technical officer in the Works and Buildings Department, and selected for establishment by the selection board, has been refused a certificate on the ground that his disability contracted during war service prevents him from serving over seas; and whether, as this is an officer admittedly competent to carry out his duties satisfactorily at home, he will grant the certificate?

Sir P. SASSOON: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave him on the 18th May, and would add that since that date I have decided that, where the disability can be regarded as attributable to war service, fitness for service in Iraq will not be insisted upon as a condition of establishment. It is under consideration whether the case which I imagine the hon. Member has in mind comes within this concession.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

GOVERNORS (POWER OF CERTIFICATION).

Mr. THURTLE: 29.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how often the Governor-General and the lieutenant-governors of provinces have had recourse to the power of certification daring the last three years?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Earl Winterton): If by the "power of certification" the hon. Member intends to refer to the exercise of the special power to enact legislation, the answer is that in the last 36 months the Governor-General has had recourse to this power once, and the Governor of Bengal once. (There are no lieutenant-governors in India.) If he intends to include rejected or reduced Budget votes which the Governor-General and Governors have "restored" then I must obtain a detailed statement from India.

GOVERNMENT OFFICES (REMOVAL TO DELHI).

Mr. THURTLE: 30.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what offices and establishments of the Government of India will be removed from Simla and permanently located in Delhi; and when?

Earl WINTERTON: If the hon. Member will repeat his question after the Recess, I hope to be able to give him, a reply.

CONSPIRACY ACTS AND MARTIAL LAW (PRISONERS, PUNJAB).

Mr. THURTLE (for Mr. LANSBURY): 28
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how many persons sentenced to imprisonment in the Punjab during the past 12 years charged with offences connected with the. Conspiracy Acts or for offences dealt with under martial law, are still in prison, and for what further terms such persons will be detained; how many of these prisoners, if any, died while in prison; the ages of the prisoners at present serving terms of imprisonment; and is it the intention of the Government to review the cases of these prisoners for the purpose of granting an amnesty?

Major Sir HARRY BARNSTON (for Earl WINTERTON): My right hon. Friend has not available the information
asked for, but is taking steps to obtain it, and will communicate with the hon. Member in due course.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

DANGEROUS STRUCTURES.

Sir R. THOMAS: 31.
asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the recent collapse of a house in Beak Street, Regent Street, his attention has been drawn to the state of the law in regard to dangerous structures, inasmuch as a district surveyor, who has notified a house to be dangerous, is not empowered to take steps to ensure the safety of the occupants; and whether he will adopt measures to amend the law?

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Chamberlain): I have no general jurisdiction as regards the law of building in London, which for the most part is contained in private Acts promoted by the London County Council. I will send the council a copy of the hon. Member's question, but I may mention that Section 114 of the London Building Act, 1894, already empowers a Petty Sessional Court upon the application of the council to direct that the inmates of a dangerous structure shall be removed.

Sir R. THOMAS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 5,091 defective structures were notified by the London County Council during 1926, and that in only 11 cases were the tenants removed, and will the right hon. Gentleman also thaw the attention of the London County Council to that very serious fact?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I will include that observation.

Mr. HARRIS: Is not one of the difficulties that the London County Council have to face the shortage of housing accommodation in London, and that there is nowhere to transfer people?

Mr. THURTLE: Are there not large numbers of empty houses in Kensington, Chelsea and such places?

Sir R. THOMAS: Is it not better——

Mr. SPEAKER: This is becoming a debate.

BERKSHIRE.

Major GLYN: 32.
asked the Minister of Health what is the latest available figure for houses built in the county of Berkshire, excluding the borough of Reading, for the last 12 months, indicating the number built with Government aid and the number without any public assistance; what were the respective figures for a

STATEMENT showing the number of Houses Completed in the County of Berkshire (excluding the County Borough of Reading) during the under-mentioned periods.


—
Houses completed during the


Year ended 31st march 1927.
year ended 31st march 1926.
period 1st January,1919, to 31st march, 1927.


Houses completed with State-Assistance by—





Local Authorities
384
108
1,734


Private enterprise
531
332
1,459


Total
915
440
3,193


Houses completed without State-Assistance
505
660
2,173*


Total (All houses)
1,420
1,100
5,366


* This entry relates to houses built in urban areas since 1st October,1922,and in rural areas since 1st April,1923. Information prior to these dates is not available.

WHITE HART LANE ESTATE.

Mr. R. MORRISON: 35.
asked the Minister of Health whether he has received any reply from the London County Council and the Tottenham Urban District Council as to their willingness to submit to the arbitration of his Department the question of the terms upon which tenants of the post-War houses on the White Hart Lane estate could have their rates and rents collected weekly; and, as this question has been under negotiation for seven years, will he, in the interests of a large number of tenants who are being continually summoned for non-payment of rates, press these authorities to accept arbitration without further delay?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I have received a reply from the London County Council, and will send the hon. Member a copy of the letter. No reply other than of an interim character has yet been received from the Tottenham Urban District Council, When I hear from them, I will consider what further steps, if any, can be taken in the matter.

year ago; and what are the same figures for the total number constructed since 1918?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: As the answer involves a tabular statement, I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permision, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

SIDEWALKS.

Major GLYN: 33.
asked the Minister of Health whether he will empower local authorities to expend money raised for the maintenance or the improvement of roads within their areas for the purpose of making sidewalks, thus enabling the existing width of road to be used for vehicular traffic only?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): I have been asked to reply. The powers already at the disposal of highway authorities enable them to effect improvements of this character. Many authorities are availing themselves of these powers to carry out such works, which in suitable cases are eligible for grants from the Road Fund.

Major GLYN: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is a suitable case, because there are several cases where it has been refused?

Colonel ASHLEY: Where there is urgent public need.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on many roads there is no footpath at all, and people have to take to the main roads, to their own danger?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am fully aware of that, but the hon. Member will appreciate that the first move in this matter must come from the local authorities, and also that there are many calls on the Road Fund, so that it is a matter of balancing advantages as between this improvement and that improvement.

Major GLYN: Who is the best judge of urgent public need, Whitehall or the local authorities?

Colonel ASHLEY: The local authorities certainly, and it is for them to make the move.

Major GLYN: If a request comes from a local authority, will the Minister always agree?

Colonel ASHLEY: I must exercise discretion and see how much money I have got.

Mr. RICHARDSON: Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman transferred money to the Treasury that ought to have gone to the improving of these roads?

TRAVELLING FACILITIES, NORTH AND EAST LONDON.

Sir FREDRIC WISE: 36.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he has now received the Report from the London Traffic Advisory Committee for dealing with the problem of travelling facilities in North and East London; and what action he proposes to take?

Colonel ASHLEY: I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Hornsey (Captain Wallace) in answer to a similar question on Thursday, 21st instant, a copy of which I am sending my hon. Friend.

Sir F. WISE: Will the Report be available for Members of Parliament?

Colonel ASHLEY: I have not, yet received the Report, but I hope that I shall very shortly. As to its publication, that will have to be considered when I have received it.

Sir F. WISE: Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the enormous number of people who are interested in this Report, after the three important inquiries that have been made in regard to this situation?

Colonel ASHLEY: Yes, I am aware of that.

Mr. R. MORRISON: In view of the fact that this Report represents two years' work on the part of this Committee, does the right hon. Gentleman not think it is of sufficient importance to have it published, irrespective of his own opinions as to the value of the Report?

Colonel ASHLEY: I shall have to consider that.

BRIDLE PATHS (MOTOR VEHICLES).

Major GLYN: 37.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he will take steps to empower local authorities to prohibit motor vehicles from using tracks and bridle paths across down country, seeing that if motor vehicles continue to use such tracks without restriction it may devolve upon the local authorities to maintain such tracks as roads?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am advised that any person who, without the consent of the owner of the soil, drives a vehicle on a foot or bridle path or on any land which is not, a public carriage-way, commits an act of trespass. It would be a matter of considerable legal difficulty to give local authorities any control over such use of private land.

Major GLYN: In the case of a right-of-way which has been established by long custom on land which is not claimed by private owners, what is the position?

Colonel ASHLEY: If land is not claimed by private owners, then surely it must be under the jurisdiction of a public authority, and, if so, it will probably be a charge on the public.

Major GLYN: Under those circumstances, if motor vehicles use them, have the public authority power to close such roads if they are not metalled roads?

Colonel ASHLEY: I should require notice of that question.

Mr. HARRIS: Are not recognised bridle tracks which have been open for horses for centuries open for motor vehicles?

Colinel ASHLEY: If they are only open to horses, they will not be open to motor vehicles.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is it not a fact that the owners of these lands are good enough to allow the public to use them, and why should anybody else interfere? Should we not rather encourage owners to do this?

Mr. TAYLOR: Is it not within the power of a local authority to prohibit the use of these tracks by motor vehicles without any fresh legislation?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is a question of law.

VICTORIA DOCK ROAD, LONDON.

Sir GEORGE HUME: 38.
asked the Minister of Transport if his attention has been drawn to a resolution passed by the London County Council, on 29th March, 1927, to the effect that His Majesty's Government be informed that the council is prepared to enter forthwith into negotiations with the Minister of Transport in regard to the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Cross-River Traffic in London concerning the proposed Victoria Dock Road, and to a letter written by the clerk of the council to the Prime Minister of the same date with respect, inter alia, to this matter; will he state what steps have been taken to commence such negotiations; and, if no steps have been taken, what are the obstacles in the way of action being taken?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am aware of the terms of the resolution and of the letter to which my hon. Friend refers, and it caused me considerable satisfaction to receive the assurance that the London County Council were prepared to negotiate with me upon the subject of the proposed Victoria Dock Road. Having received this assurance, I have now been able for some time past to discuss procedure and ways and means with some of the other authorities who are interested, and affected by, the scheme. As my hon. Friend knows, the proposals involve the re-housing of a considerable number of people, and it is essential that the terms and conditions of re-housing should first be settled with the statutory authority
in whose area the people live who are to be dispossessed of their homes. Negotiations upon this subject are now taking place, and I hope very soon to be in a position to open formal negotiations with the London County Council.

Mr. W. THORNE: Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman is now in communication with the Borough Council of West Ham in regard to the housing accommodation?

Colonel ASHLEY: We are having conversations.

Mr. R. MORRISON: Is the right hon. Gentleman yet in a position to say whether legislation that will be necessary will be Government legislation or whether it will be private legislation; and, if private, by what body it will be promoted?

Colonel ASHLEY: I think that must largely depend upon what bodies come into the scheme.

NEW FOREST (MANAGEMENT).

Colonel Sir GEORGE COURTHOPE: 39.
asked the hon. Member for Monmouth-shire, as representing the Forestry Commissioners, the policy of the Commissioners with regard to the management of the New Forest?

Sir LEOLIN FORESTIER-WALKER (Forestry Commissioner): The policy of the Forestry Commissioners is governed by the New Forest Act, 1877, and in particular by Section 6 of that Act, which provides that in cutting timber care shall be taken to maintain the picturesque character of the ground, and to keep the woods replenished by protecting self-sown plants or by planting, having regard to the ornamental as well as the profitable use of the ground. The working plan of the forest prepared by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests and followed by the Forestry Commissioners provides for:

(1) the growing of good oak timber wherever soil and silvicultural conditions are adapted to the purpose, and the production of coniferous timber over the remainder of the area;
(2) the preservation of the amenities of the forest; and
(3) subject to the above, the attainment of the best sustained financial results from the forest.

The Forestry Commissioners have appointed a Committee representative of local and public interests to advise them as to the selection and special treatment of areas within the inclosures of the New Forest which are of outstanding picturesque interest.

Sir G. COURTHOPE: May I ask my hon. Friend what are the objects of these enclosures, and what proportion they bear to the whole forest?

Sir L. FORESTIER-WALKER: The earlier enclosures of the 17th century were set apart for the growing of oak for the Royal Navy and other national purposes. The later enclosures, those under the Deer Removal Act of 1851, were granted to the Crown in exchange for the rights of keeping deer in the forest. The area enclosable amounts to 17,600 acres, of which no more than 16,000 acres may be enclosed at any one time (present enclosures about 15,000 acres). The remainder of the forest, amounting to about 46,000 acres, of which 5,000 acres are older timber comprising the ancient and ornamental trees for which the forest is famous, is open and unenclosed and subject to rights of common; no felling or forestry operations can be carried on within the area except supply of dead or dying timber for firewood.

Oral Answers to Questions — POST OFFICE.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 40.
asked the Postmaster-General how many meetings of the advisory committee of the Post Office have been held during his tenure of office; upon what date the last meeting took place; and whether the opinion of this advisory committee has been sought on the question of advertising the telephone service?

The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Sir William Mitchell-Thomson): The answer to the first part of the question is six; to the second, 25th May, 1927. The development of the telephone service has constantly engaged the attention of the Advisory Council; while the relative merits of different means of advertisement have not been specifically referred to the Council
I have no reason to suppose that they would dissent from the policy at present pursued.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in the case of a business committee like this, many of whom are experts, it would be possible for them to meet more than six times and, further, does he think that the miserable sum of £86 per annum, as announced yesterday, is enough for the advertising of the Government's greatest business?

Mr. SPEAKER: That question must be discussed another time.

STORNAWAY (MAIL DELIVERIES).

Mr. MacKENZIE LIVINGSTONE: 41.
asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that mails are sent to Stornoway from the mainland every week night, he will take steps during the recess to see that such mails are delivered to the addresses on the island not later than the following day, Sundays excepted?

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I am afraid there is very little to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member's question of the 24th of May. The postal services in the Island of Lewis are now on the same footing as in pre-War days, i.e., there is a daily delivery on all main routes. I really could not justify further expenditure.

CLERICAL CLASS (EX-SERVICE MEN).

Sir F. WISE: 42.
asked the Postmaster-General, in view of the large number of appointments allotted to ex-service men employed in a temporary capacity, if he is prepared to offer appointments in the clerical class to all established ex-service men who have secured the Civil Service Commissioners' educational qualifications at the December, 1926, examination?

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON: The Southborough Committee which reported upon the appointment of ex-service men to posts in the Civil Service considered the bearing which their recommendations in favour of ex-service temporary clerks might have upon the claims of the manipulative grades employed in the Post Office, and recommended that the claims of the latter should be sympathetically
considered by a Committee of the Post Office Whitley Council which was then sitting
in order that there might be no suggestion that they have been unfairly treated in the light of the special arrangements made for
the temporary clerks. The resulting recommendations of this Committee of the Whitley Council are being carried out, and I am not prepared to reopen the matter.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

SAFEGUARDING OF INDUSTRIES.

Dr. VERNON DAVIES: 43.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give up to the latest available date the number of applications for safeguarding, the number granted, the number rejected, and the number pending, respectively?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Burton Chadwick): Up to the present, 44 applications under the Safeguarding of Industries procedure have been received by the Board of Trade. Fifteen of these have been referred to Committees for enquiry, and seven duties have been imposed. Of the remaining 29 applications, three have been withdrawn or are in abeyance, 22 have been rejected without reference to a Committee, and four are pending.

Sir BASIL PETO: May I ask whether the hon. Member thinks that result satisfactory?

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Most unsatisfactory.

Sir B. CHADWICK: Yes, I think on the whole it is satisfactory.

FOREIGN MOTOR TYRES (BRITISH FACTORIES).

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD - BURY: 44.
asked the President of the Board of Trade how many foreign firms have started, or have made arrangements to start, new factories in this country for the manufacture of motor tyres since the imposition of a duty on foreign motor tyres?

Sir B. CHADWICK: References have recently appeared in the Press to proposals
by two foreign companies, or branches of foreign companies, to start new factories in this country for the manufacture of motor tyres. Another foreign company made similar arrangements last year.

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: Can the hon. Member say what are the names of those three companies?

Sir B. CHADWICK: No, I could not.

Mr. KELLY: Did I understand the hon. Gentleman to state that one company has decided since the imposition of the duty on the opening of a factory here?

Sir B. CHADWICK: I do not say that the company which has opened a factory here made a decision to open here since the imposition of the duty.

Sir B. PETO: May I ask whether this was not a case of intelligent anticipation?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is it not the case that Messrs. Goodyear said they were astonished that we had not done it long ago and that they would have opened long ago?

Mr. KELLY: Is it not a fact that Messrs. Goodyear have got a factory here?

RUSSIAN OIL PURCHASES.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: 59.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the oil purchased by the Shell Transport and Trading Company, Limited, from, the Soviet Government at the request of His Majesty's Government was sold by the company to His Majesty's Government; and, if so, what amount was paid for this oil by His Majesty's Government to the Shell Transport and Trading Company, or, alternatively, whether His Majesty's Government paid the company a buying commission?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): I understand that at the time of the Trade Agreement with the Soviet Government in 1921 a verbal request to the effect mentioned in the question was made to the Shell Company. Any purchases made in pursuance of this request were not made on behalf of the Government, and none of the oil was sold by the company to His Majesty's Government. The remaining parts of the question, therefore, do not arise.

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE (FISHERMEN).

Mr. E. BROWN: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether an amending Bill for Health Insurance is in preparation; if so, whether fishermen are to be included in it; and if it will apply to Scotland?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I have been asked to reply. As soon as the consideration of the recommendations of the recent Royal Commission on National Health Insurance has been completed, it is hoped to introduce the necessary legislation, and the question of the compulsory insurance of share fishermen both in England and Scotland, in so far as they are not already included in the scheme, would be dealt with in such legislation.

Mr. BROWN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Parliamentary Secretary made a definite statement at a meeting in Norfolk on Saturday that shore fishermen—I do not know what he meant by that—would be included in such a scheme? Can he say why that statement was made in such definite terms?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think what my hon. Friend said was "share fishermen" and not "shore fishermen." The statement that he made was corroborated by myself.

Mr. BROWN: In the "Times" newspaper the word was "shore."

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Will it be the case that if share fishermen are included, they will have to pay both the employers' and employés' contributions, and will he make sure that these fishermen want the insurance before he introduces it?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: That will be considered when the legislation is introduced.

Mr. LIVINGSTONE: Will this scheme include crofter fishermen in the Highlands?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not know what a crofter fisherman is.

Mr. BROWN: May I ask for a definite answer to my question? Has there been a decision taken? If not, why was such a decision announced in terms at a public meeting in the constituencies on Saturday?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member seems very hard to satisfy. I have already told him that if and when legislation is introduced these share fishermen will be included.

Mr. BROWN: I may be hard to satisfy, but so are the fishermen, who do not know where they are.

IRISH GRANTS COMMITTEE.

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD - BURY: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that dissatisfaction is felt amongst Irish loyalists at the inadequateness of the awards made by the Irish Grants Committee in the few cases in which the amounts of such awards have been disclosed; and whether, in view of the anxiety which exists amongst the large body of claimants to whom the amounts recommended have not been disclosed, he will state the reason for refusing to disclose the recommendations of the Irish Grants Committee to the persons interested?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I have been asked to reply. I would invite reference to the reply given by the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs to the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) on 17th May.

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: Can me right hon. Friend say what are the objections, when a case has been heard, to telling the claimants what amount has been awarded?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the answer which was given by the Prime Minister on 17th May, and I believe he will find that it deals as fully as it is possible for us to deal with the subject of his question. If, however, there should be any point with which that answer does not deal, and he will communicate with me, I will see what can be done to meet his wishes.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

STEAMSHIP "CYGNET" (HORSES).

Mr. MACQUISTEN: 47.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on 8th July 14 horses were booked to be shipped from the
island of Tiree to Oban per steamship "Cygnet" on 12th instant, which ship has often taken a larger number of horses; that the proprietors of the steamship "Cygnet" then wired that by Board of Trade Regulation they were only allowed to take four horses; and that only four horses were shipped; and if he will consider whether this Regulation, which results in loss to the islanders, can be rescinded?

Sir B. CHADWICK: I have no knowledge of the incident referred to, but I am making inquiries and will let my hon. and learned Friend know the result.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Will the hon. Member take care that no regulation of the Board of Trade is broken by this company or any other company being allowed to carry more than the prescribed number of horses?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is ample accommodation on this boat for horses, but very little for passengers?

STORNOWAY MAIL STEAMER (FISHER GIRLS' ACCOMMODATION).

Mr. LIVINGSTONE: 48.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will bear in mind, in his negotiations for the new fast Stornoway mail steamer, the need for proper accommodation for the large numbers of fisher girls who travel to and from the mainland, and the pressing need for the early morning train connection to the south that existed before the War?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the question of accommodation for large numbers of fishing girls is one which only arises four times in the year, and special arrangements have to be made on those occasions to facilitate the transport of this abnormally heavy traffic. The desirability of expediting the passage of these girls has, however, been kept in view in considering future requirements. As to the early morning train connection I would refer the hon. Member to my answers to his questions of 7th and 12th April and 10th May last.

Mr. LIVINGSTONE: But since I received that answer, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it has been agreed
to put a faster and more commodious steamer on the Stornoway service, and is he unable or unwilling to insist that the mail contractors shall expedite the sailing of that steamer in order to catch the early morning connection to the South, the loss of which means the loss of a whole day to the business people of Stornoway?

SHOPS ACT (PROSECUTION, OBAN).

Mr. MACQUISTEN: 49.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the recent prosecution under the Shops Act, 1912, of Robert Lindsay and five other jewellers in Oban; is he aware that these jewellers constitute a clear majority of that particular class, and that they have thrice petitioned the local authority, in 1924, 1925, and 1926, craving exemption from closing their place of business on any weekly half-holiday in terms of Subsection (4) of Section 4 of the Shops Act, 1912, but the local authority have declined to give effect to their petitions; and will he inquire into this case?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have communicated with the local authority in regard to the matter referred to in the question which had not previously been brought to my notice. I understand that petitions were presented in 1924 and 1925 and that a third petition was presented on the 8th instant and is presently under consideration. My information does not show whether the petitioners are a majority of the jewellers in Oban. The action to be taken on the petition falls to be decided by the local authority on whom is laid the duty of administering the Shops Act.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: What steps does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take supposing a local authority fails in its duty?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is a hypothetical question.

INFANTILE MORTALITY, CAMLACHIE DIVISION.

Mr. STEPHEN: 50.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the infantile mortality rate for the Mile End,. Whitevale, and Dennistoun wards in the Camlachie Parliamentary Division for the quarters ended in March and June for the years 1926 and 1927?

Sir J. GILMOUR: As the statement desired includes a number of detailed figures I propose, with the hon. Member's

Ward.
1926.
1927.


1st Quarter.
2nd Quarter.
1st Quarter.
2nd Quarter.


Mile End
…
…
…
…
…
200.0
183.2
123.3
118.6


Whitevale
…
…
…
…
…
142.9
89.8
129.8
96.4


Dennistoun
…
…
…
…
…
59.7
101.3
41.7
44.9


All the above rates are expressed as rates per 1,000 births.

FACTORY ACCIDENT, ARBROATH.

Mr. JOHNSTON: 54.
asked the Home Secretary whether he has had his attention drawn to the death of a woman weaver in an Arbroath factory; is he aware that this woman was 62 years of age and was engaged, along with another weaver, in lifting a piece of finished cloth weighing 115 lbs.; that the Regulations in the woollen trades forbid women lifting cloth pieces weighing over 50 lbs., and that the jury at the inquiry under the Fatal Accidents Act has drawn attention to the dangers of heavy weightlifting by women; and what steps, if any, he proposes to take?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT(Captain Hacking): A report on this case has been called for and when it is received the Home Secretary will go carefully into the matter and communicate the result to the hon. Member.

COAL MINING INDUSTRY.

WAGES.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: 51.
asked the Secretary for Mines what is the percentage increase in colliery workers' average earnings per shift over those of July, 1914; how this percentage compares with the increase in the cost of living; and what the same comparison has been at other periods since the end of Government control?

The SECRETARY for MINES(Colonel Lane Fox): The latest figure that I have of the average earnings per shift of colliery workers relates to the month of

permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

April last. At the present time the figure would be rather lower, but during April the increase of earnings over June, 1914, was 62 per cent. and the increase in the cost of living was 65 per cent. In answer to the last part of the question, I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table which gives the information asked for since the beginning of 1922.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is it not a fact that the figures already available indicate that the wages of almost all the miners of Great Britain are at the minimum; that the figures given by the right hon. Gentleman are over an exceptional period, and are totally different from the facts as they exist to-day?

Colonel LANE FOX: The figures which I have given are not over an exceptional period. The comparison is between the present time and the period before the War.

Major COLFOX: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how those figures compare with the corresponding figures relating to agricultural workers?

Mr. WILLIAMS: Is it not a fact that the average wages of mine workers today are approximately 30 per cent. over pre-War wages, while the cost of living is 60 per cent. over the pre-War figures according to the statistics of the Labour Ministry?

Colonel LANE FOX: No, Sir. The hon. Gentleman's figures are quite wrong, and the figures I have given are absolutely correct. With regard to agricultural workers, I am afraid that I have not got the figures.

Mr. PALING: Do the figures not prove than the miners are getting less wages than at any time since 1914?

CHANGES in the Earnings of Coal Miners and in the general Cost of Living in each quarter from 1922.


Period.
Earnings per Shift.



Average Amount
Percentage Increase on July,1914.
Cost of Living: Percentage Increase on July,1914.*


1922.
s.
d.
Per cent.
Per cent.


1st Quarter
…
…
…
11
0¼
70
87


2nd Quarter
…
…
…
10
2½
58
82


3rd Quarter
…
…
…
9
4
44
80


4th Quarter
…
…
…
9
5¼
46
79


1923






1st Quarter
…
…
…
9
7¾
49
76


2nd Quarter
…
…
…
9
9¾
51
71


3rd Quarter
…
…
…
10
7¼
64
72


4th Quarter
…
…
…
10
3¾
59
76


1924.






1st Quarter
…
…
…
10
2¾1
58
77


2nd Quarter
…
…
…
10
11¼
69
71


3rd Quarter
…
…
…
10
10¼
68
72


4th Quarter
…
…
…
10
7
63
79


1925.






1st Quarter
…
…
…
10
7½
64
78


2nd Quarter
…
…
…
10
6¾
63
73


3rd Quarter
…
…
…
10
4¾
60
74


4th Quarter
…
…
…
10
5¼
61
76


1926.






1st Quarter
…
…
…
10
4¾
60
72


April
…
…
…
10
4¾
60
72


May-December
…
…
…


Dispute at Mines.



1927.






April
…
…
…
10
6
62
65


*Mean of four consecutive ascertainments; e.g., mean 1st January, 1st February, 1st March and 1st April=Quarter ended March.

ACCIDENT CASE, ASKERN, DONCASTER.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 52.
asked the secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the case of F. Hughes, Mount Pleasant, Askern, near Doncaster, who met with an accident at the local colliery on 16th March, 1927, which caused temporary incapacity and necessitated an operation; that he presented himself before the compensation doctor for the purpose of undergoing the operation, but was informed that no bed was available or would be for several months; that full compensation was paid for four weeks and

Colonel LANE FOX: That is exactly what they do not prove.

Following is the table:

three days, after which it was reduced to 2s. 6d. per week on the understanding that he was fit for light work, pending surgical treatment; that his employers refuse to find suitable employment, and as the injured man cannot afford to engage legal assistance he is deprived of any benefit under Section 16 of the Compensation Act, 1923; and will he inquire into this and similar cases with a view to amending the Compensation Act?

Captain HACKING: My right hon. Friend has made inquiry with regard to this case and is informed that while no
bed was available at the local hospital, a bed was engaged for the workman at a home or hospital in Leeds, that money was given him by the colliery company to pay his expenses to Leeds, but that he never, in fact, presented himself at the home or hospital. Nor have the company refused to find him suitable employment. They would gladly employ him but, as they are employing other men on light work who have met with injuries, have no suitable job available at present. As regards the last part of the question, the Registrar points out that the workman does not need legal aid for the purposes of an application under the provision in question. If he attends at the Court, he will be assisted in filling up his papers and generally in bringing his case personally before the Court.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Although in theory the facts may seem to be as the hon. and gallant Gentleman indicates, is it not a fact that in practice it is almost an impossibility, under Section 16 of the Compensation Act of 1923, for a workman who is partially incapacitated to establish a claim for compensation, and will the hon. and gallant Gentleman look into this matter with a view to amending Section 16 of that Act?

Captain HACKING: There is really no necessity to amend Section 16, because workmen have every facility at the present time for receiving aid in the way I have indicated.

INDUSTRIAL AND REFORMATORY SCHOOLS.

Mr. SHEPHERD: 53.
asked the Home Secretary the cost per head per week of the upkeep of boys and girls in industrial and reformatory schools in the years 1918 and 1926, respectively?

Captain HACKING: The average estimated cost for the current financial year is 29s. 6d. The information as regards the actual expenditure for last financial year is not yet available. I regret that I cannot give a comparable figure for 1918–9, as a system of fixed grants was then in force.

LORD MAYORS (TITULAR DISTINCTION).

Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKE: 55.
asked the Home Secretary whether he has in any other recent cases besides that of Liverpool given an intimation that a lord mayor is not entitled to the designation The Right Honourable?

Captain HACKING: No, Sir. As my right hon. Friend explained in his reply last Monday, he only takes action in this matter when attention is called to an unauthorised use of the prefix and no other case has recently been brought to his notice.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: May we take it that the statement published in a northern newspaper to the effect that the discussion originally arose in Cardiff is entirely incorrect?

Captain HACKING: I have not seen any statement in the newspapers referring to this matter, but I can quite safely say that no communication has taken place between the Home Office and the authorities in Cardiff in recent years.

Captain ARTHUR EVANS: Is it not a fact that when Cardiff was raised to the status of a city, Garter King-at-Arms approved of the Lord Mayor using the title of right honourable?

Captain HACKING: That question was answered yesterday.

Mr. STEPHEN: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman not think that in a civilised community it is about time we were stopping the use of these nick names altogether?

CIVIL SERVICE (EX-SERVICE MEN).

Mr. MACQUISTEN: 56.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, with regard to the forthcoming open competitive examination for the admission of girls and boys to the general and departmental clerical classes of the Civil Service, in view of the obligations devolving upon the Government to give preferential treatment to ex-service men and the large number of ex-service men who are still waiting assignment, and the recent indications that recruitment for the Civil Service is to be restricted, he will instruct that there should be no
further outside applicants either examined or admitted to the Civil Service until the ex-service men who passed the Southborough examination are all absorbed?

Mr. McNEILL: Out of 8,248 candidates who qualified at the Southborough examination, only 84 are still awaiting assignment. The appointment of these 84 candidates will not be prejudiced in any way by the decision to hold an open competitive examination in November next for recruitment to the clerical classes.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is it not a fact that most of the Civil Service Departments are pretty well staffed already, and would it not be as well to shut down admitting more applicants?

Mr. DUNCAN: 57.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether it is the intention of his Department to throw open to the public appointments to the position of preventive officers (Customs), seeing that for the past nine years these positions have been confined to ex-Army men; if so, whether the usual examinations will be instituted; and whether it is proposed to make any extension of the age at which applicants for these positions may apply?

Mr. McNEILL: Recruitment to the grade of assistant preventive officer in the Customs Service, which is no doubt the grade to which the hon. Member refers, will in future be by open competition among candidates who have attained the age of 19 and not attained the age of 21; but persons who have served, or are serving, in the Army, Navy or Air Force will be allowed to deduct from their actual age any time, not exceeding two years, during which they have served.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: 58.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the appointment to the Civil Service of the successful candidates in the examination to be held in November will in any way prejudice the appointment of ex-service men who have passed the Southborough examination or restrict the promotion of permanent non-pensionable men or temporary ex-service men; and whether it will cause the discharge of any temporary ex-service men either now or in the future?

Mr. McNEILL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the latter part of the question, no efficient temporary ex-service clerk will be discharged in order to make room for successful candidates from the examination referred to.

MUNICIPAL SAVINGS BANKS.

Mr. W. BAKER: 60.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he has appointed a committee to inquire into the advisability of establishing municipal savings banks; and, if so, whether an early report may be looked for?

Mr. McNEILL: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) on the 25th July.

CROWN COLONIES AND PROTECTORATES.

PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN (EARTHQUAKE).

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 61.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is intended to make any grant for the alleviation of suffering and damage by the earthquake in Palestine?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): No application has been made to the British Government by the Acting High Commissioner for financial assistance in connection with the damage done by the earthquake. The High Commissioner is on the point of returning to Palestine, and will doubtless examine the whole question on his arrival and make such recommendations to His Majesty's Government as he may think desirable.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: In the case of St. Lucia and other colonies where grants were made, were requests first received

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Yes, Sir.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any historical monuments in Palestine have suffered at all?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Fortunately, I gather that none of the more celebrated historical monuments have been severely damaged.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the Government are finding any proportion of the money required for this purpose, and will it be used to feed the populace?

NATIVES, KENYA (ASSAULTS).

Colonel WEDGWOOD: 63.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in connection with the assault on a native reported recently by Archdeacon Owen, he will consider favourably the printing of information on the native passes, informing them that they can sue for damages for unjustified assault?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: In accordance with his promise to the right hon. and gallant Member on the 2nd of May, my right hon. Friend communicated with the Acting Governor in regard to Archdeacon Owen's statement. No reply has yet been received, and until one has been received I am unable to say what action if any may be considered desirable or practicable.

BRITISH GUIANA (WOREMEN'S COMPENSATION).

Mr. GRIFFITHS: 64.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Workmen's Compensation Acts are not in force in British Guiana; and whether, in view of the fact that a recent ordinance applied provisions of the British law in Trinidad and that the conditions in Trinidad and British Guiana are similar, he will take steps to secure the application of this law in the latter Colony?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Conditions in British Guiana differ considerably from those in Trinidad, but when I have had an opportunity of estimating the effects of this legislation in the latter Colony upon all concerned I shall be ready to consider whether the enactment of a similar Measure could properly he suggested to the Government of British Guiana.

WATER SUPPLY, BLACKWELL, DERBYSHIRE.

Mr. DUNCAN: 34.
asked the Minister of Health whether he has received complaints as to the shortage of water supplies in the area of the Blackwell Rural Council of Derbyshire; whether an inspector from his Department has already investigated the matter; whether any Report has yet been issued covering the question; and, if so, what is the nature of such Report?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Complaints have been received and an investigation has been made. It is not proposed to publish any Report; what is required is to devise means of augmenting the water supply, and I am seeing what measures can be taken to this end.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Has the right hon. Gentleman's Department considered the advisability of the national collection of this water?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is rather too large a question to be dealt with now.

NAVAL ARMAMENTS (GENEVA CONFERENCE).

SIR A. CHAMBERLAIN'S STATEMENT.

Mr. CLYNES (by Private Notice): asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any statement can be made to-day on the subject of the dis-cussions at Geneva on naval policy?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: As is known to the House, His Majesty's Government thought it necessary that they should have an opportunity of conferring verbally with the British delegates in order that we might have a full understanding of the position reached in the Geneva negotiations and be enabled to take a decision on certain points referred to us by the delegates.
These questions have been fully discussed with our colleagues during the last few days, and the delegates are to-day returning to Geneva to continue the Conference, which we trust will reach a successful conclusion.
I am sorry to say that our very distinguished naval delegate, Admiral Field, is unable to return owing to ill-health, and his place will 'be taken by Rear-Admiral Pound.
In these circumstances it would be improper for me to make at this stage any detailed exposition of the British proposals or to comment on the proposals of the other Powers. The statement which I am going to read is, therefore, designed only to remove a misunderstanding which, if it continued uncorrected, could not but impede the prospects of success.
The Conference on Naval Disarmament now sitting at Geneva has discussed many important points in technical Committees and Plenary Conferences, but, in spite of the efforts of our delegates at Geneva, serious misapprehension of the aims of His Majesty's Government still prevails in some quarters. His Majesty's Government have even been charged with the desire to destroy that equality of sea power as between the United States of America and the British Empire which the Washington Conference contemplated—a suspicion for which there is no foundation.
The invitation of the President of the United States of America to take part in a Disarmament Conference was understood by His Majesty's Government to be based on his desire to develop the policy of the Washington Conference by diminishing yet further naval expenditure while maintaining national security. With this two-fold end His Majesty's Government are in complete agreement, and they desire to measure the merits of every proposal by the degree to which it furthers this two-fold end. It is on this principle that they have proposed to diminish the size and armament of battleships, while leaving unaltered the numbers fixed at Washington. It is for this reason also that they suggest limitations in the number and armament of large fighting cruisers on principles similar to those adopted at Washington for battleships. This proposal, like the first, would greatly diminish national expenditure without endangering national safety.
The questions connected with small cruisers are of a more complicated character. The strength of fleets can be stated in figures and compared with precision. Their primary function is to fight other fleets, and, speaking broadly, they can easily be compared with each other.
No such simple way of looking at the subject is possible in the case of small cruisers employed for police purposes in times of peace, and necessary for the protection of the lines of communication in time of war. Geographical considerations cannot be rationally ignored. It can hardly be denied, as was clearly stated by us when accepting the President's invitation, that such vessels are of vital necessity to an Empire whose widely-scattered parts are divided from each other by seas and oceans, whose most populous parts are dependent for their daily bread on sea-borne trade, and which would perish if it failed to protect its external trade.
It has to be noted further that the sea routes on which Britain depends for her existence lie largely in narrow waters bordered by other states. This is not the case with the United States of America, whose most important lines of communication lie either on land within her own frontiers, by sea along her own coasts, or in the great oceans. These circumstances received due consideration at Washington in 1922, and have not lost any of their importance. But it is hardly necessary to say that His Majesty's Government, while urging the special difficulties due to Britain's geographical position, are far from claiming the least right to dictate any small cruiser policy to other Powers. They accept the general principles which, as they understand them, underlie the President's policy that no maritime Power should maintain a larger Navy than is required for its own security. To translate this into figures is, for the reasons already given, far more difficult in the case of small cruisers than in the case of the larger types of surface vessels. Anything resembling the quarsi-permanent formula adopted at Washington for battleships is quite inapplicable to vessels designed for purposes which, not only may, but must, vary with the geographical and economic position of the several Powers concerned. It becomes even more inapplicable when strength is estimated in terms of gross tonnage, Without reference to numbers or armaments. Two nations each possessing 100,000 tons of battleships may be regarded without serious error as being, so far, equal in fighting power. No such statement can reasonably be made about two nations one of which has 10 cruisers of 10,000 tons, while the other has 20 cruisers of 5,000
tons. It all depends upon circumstances—though naval experts would probably agree that, if it came to fighting, the more numerous but smaller vessels would stand but a poor chance against their more powerful but less numerous opponents. If so, the country which for any reason was obliged to distribute its available tonnage among smaller units would be at a permanent disadvantage compared with one which was able to adopt a different scheme. There would be nominal parity but real inequality.
This is, of course, merely an illustration. But it suffices to explain why, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, no provisions open to this kind of criticism should be given the international authority already possessed by those parts of the Treaty of Washington which deal with strength and numbers. In the opinion of His Majesty's Government there need be no difficulty in arriving at a temporary arrangement about the immediate future of cruiser building. But the British Empire cannot be asked to give to any such temporary arrangement the appearance of an immutable principle, which might be treated as a precedent. Any other course would inevitably be interpreted in the future as involving the formal surrender by the British Empire of maritime equality, a consummation which His Majesty's Government are well assured is no part of the President's policy.

Mr. CLYNES: I cannot, of course, say anything on the merits of the statement, but I think it will be agreed that there is an advantage in having had it. Further, I think it is inevitable that some allusion may be made to-morrow to the principles underlying the statement, and I therefore only ask now whether we may be assured that an early opportunity will be afforded to the House when we resume in November for a discussion on the subject. Meantime I express the hope that the delegates who have returned will be able to produce some satisfactory result from their labours.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: His Majesty's Government fully share the hope with which the right hon. Gentleman concluded his question. I think I can certainly undertake on behalf of the Prime Minister, in his absence, that an opportunity shall be afforded early after the
resumption of the House for such a discussion if the right hon. Gentleman then desires it.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is the right hon. Gentleman able to deny the statement which has been very widely repeated abroad with reference to the 600,000 tons of cruisers stated to have been demanded by our principal delegate at the beginning of the Conference?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: My right hon. Friend never mentioned the figure of 600,000 tons, therefore I can give the assurance the hon. and gallant Gentleman desires. I take the question of the right hon. Gentleman as to facilities when the House resumes its sitting as indicating his view, which is the view of His Majesty's Government, that it is inexpedient, and almost improper, that we should enter into any detailed discussions while the Conference is still sitting at Geneva.

Mr. THURTLE: Is it not the case that, if each Power represented at Geneva is going to insist upon the special conditions of its own national security, agreement is going to be utterly impossible, and, in these circumstances, had we not better bring the protracted farce at Geneva to an end at the earliest possible moment?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I regret the tone and the wording of the hon. Member's question. His Majesty's Government must dissociate themselves expressly and at once from the reference which he has made to the Conference now proceeding at Geneva. The basis of that Conference, as we understand it, and in the President's own intention, is to reconcile the limitation of armaments with national security, and that is the only basis on which any conference for the limitation of armaments can ever be brought to a successful issue.

Mr. J. HUDSON: Will any arrangements, which have been so far made with Japan with regard to this matter, be held to be binding upon the Government in any further negotiations that take place?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have already said it would he improper for me to enter into any detailed discussion.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SPEECH, EMSWORTH).

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, as representing the Prime Minister, whether his attention has been called to the speech of the Attorney-General at Emsworth on 22nd July last, in which he referred to the freedom of the seas as a vital necessity in every part of the Empire; and whether this represents the policy of His Majesty's Government?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I can find nothing in the report which I have seen of my right. hon. and learned Friend's speech which is in any way at variance with the policy of His Majesty's Government.

Lieut-Commander KENWORTHY: Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether by the term "freedom of the seas" the Cabinet mean what President Wilson meant at the end of the War I May I request some light on this matter? Failing that, will the right hon. Gentleman

—
Seagoing commission
Reserve
Under Repair
Naval Personnel
Admiralty Head-quarters Staff


August, 1914







Battleships
…
…
…
44
16
—
146,047
1,718


Battle Cruisers
…
…
…
7
—
1


Cruisers
…
…
…
80
27
7


Destroyers
…
…
…
183
18
9


Submarines
…
…
…
72
—
—


Torpedo Boats
…
…
…
58
41
7


Minelayers*
…
…
…
—
—
—


Aircraft Carriers
…
…
…
—
—
—


July, 1927.







Battleships
…
…
…
12
—
2
101,890
2,741


Battle Cruisers
…
…
…
4
—
—


Cruisers
…
…
…
37
4
3


Destroyers
…
…
…
89
68
5


Submarines
…
…
…
43
10
2


Torpedo Boats
…
…
…
—
—
—


Minelayers
…
…
…
1
—
—


Aircraft Carriers
…
…
…
4
2
2


*7 Cruisers were fitted as Minelayers.

NOTE.-The number of ships shown in the table for July, 1927, will be increased during the financial year by two Battleships, five Cruisers and one Submarine.

Mr. CONNOLLY: 12.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state the cost of salaries and wages for the personnel of the Navy for 1913 and 1926, respectively, and the salaries and wage

man request his colleagues not to make speeches on subjects about which they know nothing?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a proper question.

ROYAL NAVY (STATISTICS).

Rear-Admiral SUETER: 11.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give in a tabular statement the number of battleships, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, torpedo-boats, minelayers, and aircraft carriers in commission and reserve in August, 1914, and July, 1927, the number of personnel in the Navy in August, 1914, and July, 1927, and the numbers of the administrative staff at the Admiralty in August, 1914, and July, 1927?

Lieut-Colonel HEADLAM: I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, have a tabular statement circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

costs for the Admiralty Office for the same years?

Lieut-Colonel HEADLAM: The cost of the pay of the personnel of the Navy was approximately £8,470,000 in 1913,
and £14,670,000 in 1926. With regard to the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 9th March last to the hon. Member for the Elland Division (Mr. Robinson) [OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th March 1927; Cols. 1214–1215, Vol. 203.]

Mr. CONNOLLY: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman not see that in the Navy Estimates the details for the Admiralty Office are given in the same way as the details for the personnel of the Navy?

BILLS PRESENTED.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BILL,

"to amend the Unemployment Insurance Acts, 1920 to 1926," presented by Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLAND; supported by Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. McNeill, Mr. Betterton, and the Solicitor-General; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday, 8th November, and to be printed. [Bill 190.]

EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL,

"to continue certain expiring laws," presented by Mr. McNEILL; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday, 8th November,, and to be printed. [Bill 191.]

BILLS REPORTED.

Ministry of Health Provisional Orders

Confirmation (No. 11) Bill [Lords],

Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.

Bill to be read the Third time To-morrow.

Ministry of Health Provisional Orders
Confirmation (No. 12) Bill [Lords],

Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.

Bill to be read the Third time To-morrow.

Ministry of Health Provisional Order Confirmation (Hove Extension) Bill [Lords],

Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.

Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,

Finance Bill,

Feltwell Fuel Allotment Charity Bill,

Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.

Crown Lands (No. 2) Bill, with an Amendment.

Amendments to—

Brighton Corporation Bill [Lords],

Bedford Corporation Bill [Lords],

Coventry Corporation Bill [Lords],

Coventry Corporation (Boundary Extension) Bill [Lords],

Derby Corporation Bill [Lords],

Gainsborough Bridge Bill [Lords],

Hospital of St. Mary the Virgin (Newcastle-upon-Tyne) Bill [Lords],

Liverpool Corporation Bill [Lords],

Mersey Tunnel (Birkenhead Entrance, etc.) Bill [Lords],

Peterborough Corporation Bill [Lords],

Salford Corporation Bill [Lords],

Scarborough Gas Company (Consolidation) Bill [Lords],

South Staffordshire Mond Gas Company Bill [Lords],

Sunderland Corporation Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

PUBLIC PETITIONS.

Third Report from the Select Committee brought up, and read; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE BILL [Lords].

Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday, 8th November, and to be printed. [Bill 195.]

ALIENS RESTRICTION BILL [Lords].

Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday, 8th November, and to be printed. [Bill 193.]

MEDICAL AND DENTISTS ACTS AMENDMENT BILL [Lords].

Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Tuesday, 8th November, and to be printed. [Bill 194.]

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

[20TH ALLOTTED DAY.]

REPORT [26TH JULY].

Resolutions reported.

CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1927.

CLASS V.

1."That a sum, not exceeding £7,303,564, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Ministry of Labour and subordinate Departments, including the Contributions to the Unemployment Fund, and Payments to Associations, Local Education Authorities, and others for administration under the Unemployment Insurance and Labour Exchanges Acts; Expenditure in connection with the Training of Demobilised Officers, Non-Commissioned Officers and Men, and Nurses; Grants for Resettlement in Civil Life; and the Expenses of the Industrial Court; also Expenses in connection with the International Labour Organisation (League of Nations)."

2. "That a sum, not exceeding £561,132, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Relief arising out of Unemployment."

3. "That a sum, not exceeding £40,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Grants to Local Authorities, etc., in Great Britain for assistance in carrying out approved Schemes of useful work to relieve Unemployment."

4. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,050,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Grants to Local Authorities, etc., in England and Wales, in respect of Capital Works approved as Unemployment Schemes."

CLASS IV.

5. "That a sum, not exceeding £28,307,020, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Education, and of the various Establishments connected therewith, including sundry Grants-in-Aid."

CLASS I.

6. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,117,513, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class I of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; cols. 1169–70.]

CLASS II.

7. "That a sum, not exceeding £4,886,621, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927, cols. 1173–4.]

CLASS III.

8. "That a sum, not exceeding £5,789,826, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class III. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; cots. 1177–8.]

CLASS IV.

9. "That a sum, not exceeding —5,304,103, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IV. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927, cols. 1182–3.]

CLASS V.

10. "That a sum, not exceeding £37,340,354, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will some in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class V. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in his Service, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927, col. 1184.]

CLASS VI.

11. "That a sum, not exceeding £6,967,904, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VI. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927, cols. 1187–8.]

CLASS VII.

12. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,553,932, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the
sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VII. of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th. July, 1927, cols. 1191–2.]

CLASS VIII.

13. "That a sum, not exceeding £39,566,510, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VIII of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; col. 1193.]

CLASS IX.

14. "That a sum, not exceeding £314,295, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IX of the Estimates for Civil Services."—[For Services included in this Class, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; col. 1193.]

REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1927.

15. "That a sum, not exceeding £43400,220, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which wilt come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments."—[For Services included here, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; col. 1194.]

NAVY ESTIMATES, 1927.

16. "That a sum, not exceeding £37,116,110, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Navy Services."—[For Services included herein, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; col. 1194.]

ARMY ESTIMATES, 1927.

17. "That a sum, not exceeding £21,441,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure in respect of the Army Services (including Ordnance Factories)."—[For Services included here, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; cols. 1197–8.]

AIR FORCE ESTIMATES, 1927.

18. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,701,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for Expenditure
in respect of the Air Force Services."—[For Services included herein, see OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th July, 1927; cols. 1203–4.]

First Resolution read a Second time.

Mr. T. SHAW: I beg to move, to leave out "£7,303,564," and to insert instead thereof "£7,303,464."
May I, before commencing the principal subject of the afternoon, press the Minister to act as courteously as possible in the matter of the Bill that has just been mentioned. It will almost inevitably be a Bill of reference and cross reference. The position already is terribly involved, and the sooner Members can have the proposals of the Government in their hands the earlier they will be able thoroughly to consider the matter. Further, as this system of cross reference, owing to the number of Acts, is so extremely complicated, may we ask the Minister, by Memorandum or other means, to explain exactly what the proposals will mean in the sense of the law as it will then be brought up to date.
4.0 p.m.
I do not intend to enter into a criticism of the Estimates themselves. So far as the actual administration of the Ministry in Unemployment Insurance is concerned, I shall leave the matter wholly to my hon. Friends on the benches behind me. There is only one matter in the Estimates that I should like to mention. On page 63. there are classes dealing with allowances to trainees and training and other grants to institutions. It appears that in 1926 the sum of £334,849 was spent for these purposes, while in 1927 the Estimate is for £69,293. I do not doubt in the slightest degree that the Minister looks upon this question with the sympathy with which every previous Minister has looked upon it. It seems to me, and always has seemed to me, that one of the best things that can be done for these poor people who came back crippled from the War was to make them as self-respecting as possible, and to give them an interest in life, and this training is vitally essential in their own interest, as well as in the interest of the State. I mention this, not because I think there is any cheeseparing here, but because I would like to be assured that there is no cheeseparing, and that the policy of the Minister remains what it always has been, to render every possible
assistance in the training of these men, and to make them self-respecting members of society, instead of men who are brooding about their injuries.
This opportunity is always used for dealing with the work of the Minister of Labour as far as unemployment and the general condition of the workers are concerned, and I am sure the Minister of Labour will not challenge the statement that he, particularly, is responsible for realising the doctrine of his party, as laid down in leaflet 2415, where his party is said to aim at improving the workers' lot, and helping in every way possible the struggling poor. I am going to take that as my text, and, in dealing with these Estimates, apply myself to the question as to whether anything has been done by the Minister in order to carry out this declaration publicly made. First of all, I would like to know, as definitely as it is possible for us to get to know, what the Minister really is doing with regard to the hours of labour. There seems to be, on the part of the public and in the Press, a misunderstanding with regard to the Washington Convention. There seems to be an understanding that there is no honour involved, and that the rejection of the Washington Convention leaves no stain of a broken word of any character. May I call the attention of the House to the fact that hundreds of thousands of our men gave their lives for what a German statesman called "a scrap of paper"? In the Treaty of Peace, signed by the representatives of the Allies, there was a specific declaration agreed to by the nations with regard to this matter. Let me read from the actual Treaty one or two of the passages. The Treaty says:
But, holding as they do, that labour should not be regarded merely as an article of commerce, they think that there are methods and principles for regulating labour conditions which all industrial communities should endeavour to apply so far as their special circumstances will permit.
In order to achieve this object, one of the things proposed was
the adoption of an eight hours day or a 48 hours week as the standard to be aimed at where it has not already been attained.
Can anything be more specific than that in the Treaty of Peace? And this was signed because of the fact that the
workers of the allied countries had made such terrible sacrifices. Now all the signatories to this Treaty, I suppose were, like Brutus, honourable men, and all we ask is that honourable men should fulfil their obligations, and justify the statement they made that the 48 hours week should be "the standard to be aimed at where it has not already been attained." According to the Treaty of Peace, the first Labour Conference was to be called at Washington in order to arrange, if possible, to carry into effect what the Treaty itself definitely stated, and the first item on the Agenda of that Conference in Washington was this question of the hours of labour. What took place at Washington? And here I really speak with intimate knowledge, as I happened to be the Chairman of the body who drew up the Washington Convention. Not only did the representatives of the British Government agree to the Convention, but the representatives of the employers agreed to it, and I wonder whether the employers themselves are prepared to take their agreement and regard it as a scrap of paper. If the Labour Members of the Conference had known that they were dealing with people whose agreement meant nothing, they would have saved their time and gone home. They took for granted that they were dealing with strictly honourable men, whose word was their bond, and who would try to realise what was agreed upon. What was agreed to in Washington was the 48 hours week.
What I want to know is, whether this Convention is to be treated as a scrap of paper, and if the Minister will tell us exactly what the real intentions of the Government are? It is idling and fooling with the question to say they have not had time to get to know what things are. It is not correct, and everybody knows it is not correct. We are entitled to ask the Government fairly and squarely to state exactly where they stand on this matter. I know we shall be told that certain countries may pass legislation but will never attempt to apply it. I have heard that statement before, and I have seen a little of the application of laws on the Continent. Really, I do think we in this country protest too much, and that we are not quite so far ahead of everybody else as we claim to be. As a matter of fact,
if the Home Secretary would give permission, I think the best thing that could happen to the working men of England would be to get a deputation from the Polish working men to explain to us how it would be possible to get to their position as far as the hours of labour are concerned. We who have boasted that we were the first in industrial progress are, on the question of hours of labour, below the standard of the Polish workers. That is a fact for which we on these benches are so proud of being Britons.
It is time we knew definitely and squarely whether the Convention is to be ratified, or whether the Government have no intention in the near future of introducing any legislation of any kind dealing with the hours of labour. I know that the Government can act quickly enough when they want to increase the hours of labour. They did not need eight years to come to a decision to increase the miners' hours. They could act in eight weeks when they made that decision, but now, eight years after the proposition was made for reducing hours, we still find them not in a position to make a decision, because there are differences of interpretation, matters have to be cleared up, further experience is necessary, and the rest. Really, if the Minister wanted to ratify the Convention, he could easily clear away any doubts he has, and get to the ratification very quickly. The fact of the matter is, that we can see no intention of carrying out the policy laid down in the Treaty of Peace, and agreed to both by employers and Government representatives at Washington.
May I deal for a moment with other matters? I think the chief reason I have for objecting to this Estimate is not even the Washington Convention. It is the absolute failure of any positive proposal on the part of the Government to do what they said they were going to do, namely, improve the lot of the worker and help the poorest of the poor. Where is the progress that we have made since the Minister has been administering his Department? What is the position bi this country of ours to-day? I saw yesterday, in an evening paper, a very striking article from which, if I may, I will read a paragraph to the House. The writer is speaking of the work going on in Piccadilly, and he says:
The number of unemployed gazing enviously over the barriers at the display of work was not so large, however, as it was yesterday. Despair has thinned their ranks, and hunger has driven them elsewhere.
'It is always the same,' one of the foremen told a 'Star' reported. 'They come along in hundreds, full of hope the first day of any new job. Then they find that only a few extra men are required, and they go back to their homes or try some other district. It is heartbreaking to have to turn them away, but we have our own men for the job.'
That is the position in our own country to-day. What a position after three years of a Government with a majority of two to one, which was going to give us stability, progress, development of trade, and consequent reduction of unemployment! That is the position in which we find ourselves. Men should be tested by their deeds, and not by their speeches. The only thing which the Government have stabilised is the high rate of unemployment. That appears to be absolutely stabilised in the region of a million. I have taken the trouble to get some figures with regard to the same period of the year from 1922 to 1927 inclusive. In June, 1922, there were 1,436,000—I leave out the smaller figures—and in June, 1927, there were 1,004,000 persons registered as unemployed. There were 1,009,000 recorded as unemployed in June, 1924, when there was a Bolshevist, a dangerous, and almost a criminal Government in office. According to the figures there are 5,000 fewer now, but I am not prepared to admit for a moment that there are 5,000 less in reality.
I know that the Minister says there are so many more men working now than there were in 1924. Obviously, the population, not only of this country but of the world, is increasing, and our markets ought to be increasing more than in ratio to our own increase of population. The increase of population in our great markets as a rule is higher in percentage than it is in our own country. Therefore the Minister can claim no credit for the natural growth of the labour population.
The fact remains—and it is a cynical and a very serious one—that we have at the present day on the books 1,004,000 unemployed, and we are still making up leeway to some extent as a result of the great stoppage of last year. It is extremely questionable—God knows we all wish the figures would come down—
whether this year is going to see any reduction below the million. That is the position we are in with regard to unemployment. It is safe to say that not only have we not relieved unemployment as we ought to have done, but the real position of the worker has become worse. Unemployment is rampant. I have been in my own county among the people from whom I sprang and who I know best. These people are losing hope. Both manufacturers and workers are losing hope. They have up to now been the most optimistic and cheery of any community in the world. I venture to say without fear of contradiction that there are no people on earth who can work like the Lancashire cotton workers; and I have seen a lot of them in many countries doing work similar to that of our own. I think any authority who knows anything about the cotton trade will admit that there is not a finer body of workers in the world, and yet they scarcely ever know what it is to receive a full week's wages. The are really beginning to wonder whether this country will recover again.
Take the wages of the workers. During the first six months of this year the workers have lost nearly a quarter of a million of money per week in wages. Here again a remarkable fact emerges. In the first six months of the year 1924 there was a weekly rise in wages of £580,000. To set against it there was I reduction in wages amounting to £23,000 weekly, so that there was a total net gain of £557,000 per week in wages. In 1927, the result is a net reduction in the six months of £300,000 per week. Look at the difference between the two. When one considers these figures, 1924 stand out like a green oasis in the desert wages rising enormously all round. With the exception of 1925, when there was a very slight rise—£17,000, not £500,000 odd, was net gain per week—every year shows a reduction in the wages rates of the works in this country. How is it. I ask, that 1924 shows this extraordinary state of things? I go further. Test the workers' conditions by another thing, and you will find that the workers driven to the guardians for relief number 100,000 more to-day than in 1924. How can we vote for the Estimates of the Minister when, instead of seeing the position of the workers improving, we see it steadily
getting worse. We see wage rates coming down. We do not see unemployment declining. We see more and more people having to go to the Guardians. It is absolutely impossible for us to accept the idea that the position in this country is improving as far as the workers are concerned.
We have the same state of things with regard to the Unemployment Insurance Fund. The figures are really extraordinary. I believe I am fairly safe in saying, that, as far as the debt on the Unemployment Insurance Fund is concerned, it touched its lowest point in 1924, began to rise again in 1926, and is now very high indeed. So that from beginning to end, we see no pleasant prospect for the workers. We see no good that has come from the stability that was going to be given to us, and, worst of all, we see absolutely no policy on the part of the Government. Drift, drift, drift, and no policy whatever. When we come to consider the sums devoted by the Government to exceptional work in districts that are badly hit, we do not find any progressive policy. We find, wherever we turn, a dark outlook without any brightness and without any hope of immediate help for the future. Unless the Minister can tell us of some new decisions that have been taken, there will be no alternative but for us to go into the Lobby to vote for the reduction of £100 in the Estimates which I have moved.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton): The right hon. Gentleman, in the opening words of his speech, said that he proposed to make what he called a general review of the present situation. He also stated, what, no doubt, will be the fact, that various questions will be raised in the course of this Debate, and, if that be so, my right hon. Friend will reply to them later. The right hon. Gentleman, in making what he called a general review of the situation, asked the House to draw certain inferences and certain deductions from the text which he gave to us. I take it that what this House desires is to obtain something like a true picture of the present situation, I hope, an unbiased and a fair picture. But if I am to present that picture it is quite necessary for me to add certain very relevant facts to those mentioned
by the right hon. Gentleman and to call the attention of the House to other facts which cannot be left out of account if we are to arrive at anything like a true picture. I am quite certain that nobody in this House desires that picture to be overdrawn either in one direction or in another.
The House, I am sure, will believe me when I say, that I do not wish for a moment to minimise the fact that there are at the present time some million persons, men, women and children, out of work, and I am sure the House will believe me when I state that I do not regard that situation with complacent satisfaction or consider it as one upon which we cannot hope to improve but which we must accept as a necessity. Having said that, I would like to say a word or two which, I think, will put the picture in its true perspective and will place the House in possession of facts which ought to be borne in mind. The right hon. Gentleman drew a picture of absolutely unrelieved gloom. He saw no gleam either of satisfaction or of hope, and he held out a dark, dreary prospect which, if it were true, would make us shudder. May I mention one or two facts, which it is absolutely essential that this House should take into consideration before arriving at a definite conclusion. The first fact is one which is obvious to everybody, but which the right hon. Gentleman did not mention, namely, that a year ago last April our unemployment figures were just about as low—they were just under or just over a million, I forget which—[An HON. MEMBER: "Just under a million!"]—just under a million—if not lower than they had been at any time during the depression. I am not going back to discuss the events of last year, except just to point out that those figures had risen in June, 1926, by something like 700,000. At the end of the year, they were still something like a million and a half, and, in addition to that, we must add a million miners who were out of work. You cannot impose an economic strain, reflected by figures such as those, upon the life of any country without feeling its repercussions and after effects. To my mind, it is a fact from which we may, at any rate, derive some satisfaction, that industry in this country as a whole
has shown sufficient resilience to restore the position in April this year to what it was in April of last year. That is the first fact of which I wish to remind the House
The second point the right hon. Gentleman dismissed rather cursorily and seemed to think it was irrelevant to the discussion on which we are now engaged, but in my view it is most relevant and most important, and too little notice is taken of it. In a period of profoundest depression extending now over six years, a depression unparalleled in the history of this country, the number of insured persons—persons entered as insured on our books at the Ministry of Labour—has risen from the year 1922 to the year 1927 by over 700,000 persons. They have, indeed, risen since 1924 by about half a million. How have these very large numbers of men been absorbed in industry? There are now over 1,150,000 more persons in employment in this country than there were in 1922. It does say something, that in a time of profound depression, we have been enabled to absorb these very large numbers of persons into employment in this country. The fact of the matter is, that, in spite of these large accessions to the ranks of those absorbed in industry, the figures of the last quarter—April, May and June—show that employment was better than at any time since 1920. They show further that the cost of living figure in the month of June was lower than it had been at any time since June, 1916. It is a matter of some satisfaction that these two facts emerge: that unemployment on the one hand and the cost of living on the other were lower during that quarter than they had been for many years.
It was stated by the right hon. Gentleman, from figures which I do not question because they were the official figures of the Ministry of Labour, that the amount of weekly wages paid at the end of the first half of 1924 was something like £500,000 higher than at the beginning, while the wages paid at the end of the first half of 1927 were—I am speaking in round figures—something like £250,000 less than at the beginning. It is relevant and very important to consider this fact in connection with those figures, that the rise in wages in 1924, as shown by the statistics which have been published, was
almost entirely due to the increases in miners' wages which were given at that time. At that time the effect of the Ruhr occupation was just beginning to fade away, and it was then that wages were increased by an amount which represents a very large proportion of the figures to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred. On the other hand, the diminution during the first period of this year represents the adjustment of those wages in an industry which, as has been unfortunately shown by recent events, was not in a position to pay those wages.

Mr. BATEY: Can the hon. Member give the figures of the reduction in miners' wages?

Mr. BETTERTON: The figures with respect to the last quarter mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman showed a reduction of nearly £250,000, of which the miners' wages represented nearly £180,000. Some of the reduction is also represented by the diminution in the cost of living. As hon. Members know, there are certain agreements under which the rates of wages depend upon the cost of living.

Mr. SHAW: I have not the figures with me now; otherwise, I would have passed them over to the hon. Member.

Mr. BETTERTON: I think I have quoted the figures accurately. In round figures, they represent what I have said. The hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Mackinder), in the very interesting debate which we had on Monday last stated, at the close of the discussion, that the weekly reduction in wages as compared with 1921 amounted to something like £10,000,000. It is a fact about which there can be no dispute, if those figures are exact, that the reduction in the cost of living since 1921 over industry as a whole has been as considerable as the fall in wages. If we are to mention one fact it is necessary to mention the other also, if we are to have a true picture.

Mr. MACKINDER: Does the hon. Member really mean that at no time must wages or wages value be better than they were in 1919?

Mr. BETTERTON: No, Sir; I say exactly the opposite. I say that in regard to real wages, taking not merely cash wages but taking into consideration
also the cost of living, over industry as a whole wages are as high now as they have ever been since 1920.

Mr. WALLHEAD: The hon. Member has told us that the aggregate number of employed is, roughly, 1,000,000 more than it was three or four years ago. Is the aggregate amount of wages up in proportion to the additional million employed?

Mr. BETTERTON: Yes, certainly. I intend to refer in greater detail to the question of coal, but before I do so I want to refer to an observation which was made by the right hon. Member for Seaham (Mr. Webb) on Monday evening, when he pointed out, with perfect truth, that unemployment in this country is very unevenly distributed. I think he mentioned Chelmsford. I could mention places where unemployment is practically non-existent. I could mention places like Slough, High Wycombe, Luton, which are manufacturing towns, although not very large, and Rugby, where unemployment is either negligible or of very small dimensions. The right hon. Gentleman was right to point that out. One can, unfortunately, point to other parts of the country where unemployment is very rife. In Durham county, for instance, if you take the whole county, unemployment is just under 20 per cent., but there are places in Durham county where unemployment is up to 40 per cent., and even higher. [HON. MEMBERS: "Forty-four!"] I have a note of Stanley, where the figure is 50 per cent. Take South Wales. In Glamorganshire unemployment over the whole county is 19 per cent., but at Merthyr Tydfil the figure is 41.2 per cent.

Mr. WALLHEAD: It is disgraceful.

Mr. BETTERTON: Taking the country as a whole, unemployment is very unevenly divided. The right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), in his speech, seemed to suggest that there has been improvement only in the distributive trades and that the producing trades are not sharing anything like the same prosperity or are in anything like a prosperous condition. That is not altogether true. There are Many producing trades, such as electric engineering, motor manufacturing, artificial silk, and so on which are doing very well. The fact that these industries,
which are producing industries, are doing well indicates that there has been a change over from one employment to another and that new industries have arisen which have absorbed new entrants into industry, and had that not taken place it would have been impossible for us to have absorbed anything like the numbers we have. The fact does, undoubtedly, remain that in some of the heavy industries employment is exceedingly bad.
I will not go into the causes of unemployment in the coal industry, because there is not the time nor, perhaps, is this the proper occasion. I am only concerned with the fact, and the fact undoubtedly is that there are many men in this industry who, so far as can be seen, are not likely to be absorbed in the immediate future. It may be, and I think it is probably true, having regard to the great skill of the coal hewer—it is, as we all know, a very skilful trade, and the coal hewer often inherits it from generation to generation—and considering that often the industry is isolated in the sense that there are not other industries in the immediate neighbourhood, that it is more difficult for him to transfer his skill, great as that skill is, to other industries. With this fact in mind, we have done two things. We have, in the first place—the information is given in an answer to the hon. Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Lee) in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-day—put into operation Section 18 of the Act of last year. The agreement which we have entered into will, I think, completely carry out the objects of that Section.
But we have done something more. We are about to make further provision for training, which has been much impressed upon us by representatives of the miners, and I hope that full advantage will be taken of it by the miners. We have two training centres, at Brandon and Claydon respectively, and it is generally recognised in all parts of the House, certainly by those who have visited those centres, that they are doing very good work. They are, in a sense, experimental, inasmuch as Claydon only opened in 1925 and Brandon in March, 1926, although Brandon did not come into full operation until September, 1926. So far, 700 men have gone from these centres overseas, and the reports that we have
had of the progress they are making have been practically uniformly satisfactory. We have decided to increase forthwith the accommodation for men in those centres, which at present enables about 1,000 men per year to pass through. We have decided so to increase the accommodation as to enable that figure to be rather more than doubled, and I ask hon. Members, particularly those who sit for mining districts, to bring this fact to the notice of any men who they think would be likely to profit by such instruction.

Mr. BATEY: For what work do you train them?

Mr. BETTERTON: We train them for agricultural work in the form in which it is most likely to be useful to them in Canada or Australia.

Mr. SKELTON: Is it solely for overseas and Dominions agriculture that these two training centres are engaged?

Mr. BETTERTON: Not wholly. At Brandon it is overseas in the proportion of three to one, and at Claydon it is half and half.

Mr. BATEY: Is it for married or single men?

Mr. BETTERTON: Single men. I will now deal with other matters which arise on this Vote. It has been pointed cut that one of the most distressing features of unemployment is its effect upon young persons, and it has been stated over and over again that the demoralisation, as far as young people are concerned, is in its effect even more serious than unemployment in regard to older persons. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, together I think with the President of the Board of Education, set up not long ago what was known as the Malcolm Committee. That Committee was one of exceptional authority, presided over by a gentleman of long experience.
I will state quite shortly the four recommendations which were made and the action we propose to take upon them. The first recommendation was that the responsibility for the choice of employment work of local education authorities exercising powers should be transferred from the Board of Education to the
Ministry of Labour. That recommendation has been accepted and, in fact, has already been acted upon. The Committee also recommended the setting up of a national advisory council for juvenile unemployment. The Minister of Labour proposes to accept this recommendation also, and we anticipate that the council will represent both industrial and educational interests and will advise the Minister of Labour on the recommendations of the Committee and on all allied questions affecting juvenile employment and unemployment about which it would be an advantage to consult an authoritative and responsible body. The next recommendation of the Committee is with regard to juvenile unemployment centres. It will be the business of the Minister of Labour to see that full consideration is given to the various points that arise and we propose to ask this National Council, to which I have referred, to examine what permanent provision, if any, can be usefully made to ensure that unemployed boys and girls, instead of being allowed to roam the streets when out of work, should attend some class or centre. The fourth recommendation is one to which I can only briefly allude because, as it involves legislation, I shall be out of order if I make more than a passing reference to it. It is their recommendation regarding a working certificate scheme. I may be able to say this, that we think it would be possible to devise some simple scheme of work survey which would give no trouble to employers and be of substantial advantage. That, however, involves legislation and I will not go any further into it.

Mr. PALING: With regard to the recommendations of the Committee on the question of training centres for juveniles, did they make any recommendations that the training centres should be increased in number or extra facilities provided?

Mr. BETTERTON: There is a very long portion of the Report devoted to this subject, and perhaps the hon. Member had better read it. What I said was that we are giving this recommendation the fullest possible consideration, and we shall ask the Council to examine what permanent provision, if any, they think should be made in regard to it. There is one other point, a comparatively small one, to which I desire to refer. The
Estimates Committee made a recommendation that the Ministry should adopt some form of classification for Employment Exchanges in order to enable the Ministry of Labour and the Office of Works to survey the whole situation and work out a definite policy with regard to the provision of Employment Exchange accommodation. That recommendation we accept. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour entirely agrees with it and proposes to carry it out.
Let me say one word on the question of industrial relations, and I will not trouble the House any further. It is a matter of real congratulation to us that the number of disputes reported to the Ministry during 1927 and the number of workmen involved were only half those reported for 1925—for obvious reasons I leave out 1926—and the number of working days lost was little more than one-tenth of the corresponding period in the first six months of 1920. It is also fair to say that there has been an increasing desire to adopt the machinery with which your name, Mr. Speaker, is associated for the settlement of disputes in industry.
Let me say this in conclusion. It is not an unfair inference, from the facts I have given to the House, to say that the first half of this year was undoubtedly helped to a considerable extant by the arrears of orders from last year. That is undoubtedly the case, but even allowing for this, and I speak with all reserve, I think the volume of trade as a whole and the state of employment as a whole is probably more satisfactory than it has been in recent years. The maintenance of this situation and any improvement must depend on the extent to which the great exporting trades of the country take the necessary steps to bring their production costs to the level of those of the rest of the world. If the present position can be maintained during the slack holiday season which is now beginning, I am not without hope that we may start in October next with the normal number of workers employed at a somewhat higher level than we have had in recent years, and there is some reason to hope that that activity may continue during the winter.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: This Debate takes place at a critical moment in the
relations of the Ministry of Labour with the industries of the country, in so far as industries are concerned in the administration of unemployment insurance. This fact has been underlined by the production of a dummy Bill this afternoon on this subject. We cannot of course discuss it, but it ought to impress hon. Members with the urgency of the situation and lead them to examine some of the underlying features of the present administration of unemployment insurance benefit. It is quite true that unemployment is not spread evenly over the whole country. The first gleam of hope I have had since I returned to this House is the fact that the Minister of Labour is giving consideration to this phase of the problem, that unemployment is concentrated more or less in certain areas. I hope that careful consideration will be given to these areas, the coal mining areas and those areas which are usually expressed around the ports of the land. They have been called necessitous areas; I prefer to use another term. I prefer to call them endurance areas, for that is what they are. They have had to endure things which men and women in this country have rarely had to endure at any period in our history. The problem is first one of unemployment.
I wish the Parliamentary Secretary had said something about the relations of the Ministry of Labour with the Treasury on this matter. We are always at a disadvantage because we are trying to grapple with a Minister who is not responsible for the actual decisions taken. Speaking for my own constituency, and I believe for other constituencies also, I say that no decision taken by the present Government has been more regretted in these "endurance areas" than the decision to reverse the policy which was being carried out by Lord St. Davids Committee prior to 1925. We ought to have had from the Parliamentary Secretary a statement as to whether the Minister of Labour really agreed with the Government as a whole when they decided on a reversal of the work of that Committee. I should like to know something more of the mind of the Minister on the question of extended benefit. I should like to know how many men are going both from standard and extended benefit on to the board of
guardians in England and Wales and the parish councils of Scotland. We should know something more before this Debate closes of the mind of the Minister on the question of extended benefit. Let me also call the attention of the House to the problem of disallowances. There is a great area for which we can find no statistics whatever in the reports of the Ministry. Neither in the abstract of statistics for 1926, nor in the Blanesburgh Report, do we get any information of that area where men who have, for one reason or another, had benefit disallowed go on to the Poor Law. We do not know how many there are, or what happens to them when they go off the statistical abstract of the Ministry of Labour on to the statistical abstract of the Ministry of Health.
There is another problem which underlies this and one to which serious attention will have to be paid in the future—namely, shifting the burden from the taxes to the rates. The Government will be forced to ask those places where the rate of unemployment is small and the burden of unemployment, therefore, light, to have some regard to those areas where the pressure of unemployment is very heavy and where the burden of the rates is therefore very heavy. The burden of the rates in these areas prevents a revival of trade. Where unemployment is heaviest the burden of the rates is tending to become heavy too, and as the Regulations under which the Ministry of Health act force more and more men off both standard and extended benefit the burden of the rates in these particular localities is bound to be heavier still. There is a suggestion in the Blanesburgh Committee's Report of a new class of insured person, the person between the ages of 18 and 21. If the House will turn to the statistics they will find that inside the range of young persons presently to be affected there are a great number of young married men between the ages of 20 and 22. I am glad to see that there is a true sequence in the Ministry's Report for 1926. There is first, industrial relations and conciliation; secondly, employment; and, thirdly, unemployment. I agree with the Ministry that it is a miracle so many men find work in this country at a time like the present. The Minister is trustee for 8,680,970 males and 3,092,730 females, a
total of 11,773,700 persons, and it is a daily miracle, at a time of depression like that through which the country has gone, that only one million are out of work. To that extent I think the House should take the perspective of the Minister rather than the perspective of the right hon. Member for Preston (Mr. T. Shaw).
5.0 p.m.
My quarrel with the Ministry of Labour is that it has not done what it might have done to make work for these unemployed men. I agree that the Ministry can do little, or comparatively little, compared with what can be done outside. Let me read this passage from the Report of the Blanesburgh Committee:
We are, however, of opinion that organised and unremitted effort to reduce the volume of unemployment should always be a leading feature of the industrial policy of the country. With the limitations described above, we believe that, if the right arrangements can only be devised, useful work can be found for a very large population of capable and willing workers.
I know the Minister's reply will be, as it was in a previous Debate, that it is a question of the dispersal of capital as between one industry and another. I cannot admit that capital that is put, say, into the silk industry—although I am glad to see a new industry—would accrue to the same beneficial extent as would, say, a a large dock extension in a seaport. Whereas the Ministry realise that employment and not unemployment ought to be the real note to be struck, when they are trustees not merely for those who are out of work, but for those who are in work, their policy, in so far as they can affect the Government, has not been to make more work for those who cannot find work in the ordinary channels of trade. It is perfectly true that just now we have 1,048,000 unemployed, but go back to 1923. In that year there were 1,285,623 men, women and children out of work. We leave out 1926, but the fact is that only three times between 1920 and this week has the unemployment live register fallen below 1,000,000. We have to visualise not merely figures, but persons. Dwelling in slums has a depressing effect, and dwelling with statistics is inclined to have the same effect upon those who are always dwelling among them. If we visualise 1,250,000 people forming an army, 10 abreast, with
54 inches between the sections—and understand that this means the number unemployed during the last seven years; if we were to watch this army pass a given point, it would take 13 days and 13 nights to pass, and then we should have some idea of the number of men, women and children who figure in the statistical abstracts and the weekly Reports of the Ministry of Labour.
The problem cannot be brushed aside by hon. Members who sit for comfortable suburban seats, or Home County seats with a small percentage of population, or by Cabinet Ministers who sit for areas where no recorded figure is given in the regular returns. It is a very serious problem, although it is only a part of the labour problem in the country. Then I wish to ask a question with regard to the Employment Exchanges. The total population, as shown in the last census, was 42,700,000, and the Employment Exchanges number 410 with 752 branches, a total of 1,162. Of these, Scotland has 49 Exchanges and 122 branches, a total of 171. I should like to know if the Minister thinks these Exchanges are enough or too many, and how the machine is working in the sense of finding employment which was the primary task of the Exchanges when they were instituted. The scope of the problem is very wide. The percentage of unemployment in 1923 was 11.2; in 1924, 9.2; in 1925, 11.6; in December, 1925, 10.1, and this week it is 9 per cent. That shows that we have to deal with something which is long-continued and chronic, and about which the Ministry will have to take action. When we realise that, of these percentages, about a quarter is in the coalfields and another quarter round the seaports, we get justification for the statement, which the Minister contested, that the bulk of the industries which are doing well are in the distributive and secondary trades, although I agree that there are some new industries which are flourishing. There seems to be a tendency for new and light industries to flourish, and for the basic industries to lag behind. That means that certain territorial areas and certain trades suffer most.
With regard to relief work, my complaint about the Unemployment Grants Committee is justified by the following
figures. In December, 1925, the number of works in operation under the Unemployment Grants Committee were 1,107, and, under the Ministry of Transport, 548. There were works approved, but not commenced, numbering 191 for the Unemployment Grants Committee, and 81 for the Ministry of Transport. In December, 1926, after the reversal of the policy, there were only 481 schemes in operation under the Grants Committee and 424 under the Ministry of Transport; there were 39 under consideration but not commenced under the Grants Committee and 47 for the Ministry of Transport. The number of workers affected were, under the Unemployment Grants Committee in December, 1925, 33,281. In December, 1926, the figure dropped to 15,727, although the need was certainly not less, while the Ministry of Transport figures dropped from 16,622 to 14,345. May I say that I hope, when the statistics are issued next year, that the comparison drawn will not be that which was drawn on the tape last night, between six months this year and six months last year. I think it will be better for next year to take 1925, since 1926 was an exceptional year, and people outside may think that this problem is not as grave as it is, because the figure given, namely, 1,048,000, was 538,268 less than last year. These figures are misleading.
The problem of disallowances is a very serious one. If you turn to Appendix 9 of the Ministry of Labour Report, you will find that the umpire has something to say which I think the House ought to have read to it, and the Blanesburgh Report in Appendix 3 also calls attention to it. It is in regard to men who are said to be not genuinely seeking work. The umpire states the four conditions, with which hon. Members are familiar, and then he makes this very important statement:
There seems to be a tendency in some of courts of referees to assume that the only way in which men can get, work is to tramp round and round, and to make personal application day after day, whether or not there is any prospect of getting work by so doing and to set this up as the test of the genuineness of the search for work. Personal applications may be most useful in some industries, but in others they are a waste of time and are futile as a test of the genuineness of search for work.
This passage, I think, the House will do well to note. What is the use of working
men, in a port like Leith, visiting regularly the engineering works and shipyards when they know there are no jobs for them, merely in order to satisfy a rule? I hope all those who are concerned in the administration of the exchanges will take very careful note of this passage, and that men will not be compelled to pass a test which consists of tramp, tramp, tramp, like the boys' marching, merely for the sake of making a record on a card, unless there is some reasonable prospect of work being found. A number of men are going off the list after having their claims disallowed. If the House will look at the statistics on page 81 of the abstract, they will find that the applications made last year to the chief insurance officer numbered 442,057, and that the claims were 161,000. The claims put before the Courts of Referees were 90,000, but only 60,000 were allowed. I would like to point out how this affects a particular town. I put a question to the Minister about the port of Leith. In this one port, in the first three months of this year, of people not working a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding, two years, there were no less than 255; not making every reasonable effort to obtain suitable employment, or not willing to accept suitable employment, 242 persons. That means that numbers of these men do not get extended benefit. Since there were, all over the country, no less than 3,300,000 claims for extended benefit, the House will understand the anxiety of hon. Members who come from those areas as to what the future of extended benefit is to be under the projected scheme the Bill for which was introduced in dummy to-day.
I find that no facts at all are given about the most serious side of the unemployment question, that is about the unemployable, and I mean by the "Unemployable" those who are willing to work but unable to work, those who are able and unwilling, and those who are unable and unwilling. We do not not see anything in any statistical abstracts as to what happens to the men who, after losing standard benefit, get extended benefit, and who, after losing that, go on the Poor Law. A great deal of care ought to be taken, because this affects three classes: it affects the young men
who have never got a start; it affects the men who are middle-aged and who are passing under the unemployable rule very heavily indeed, and it affects the old men. Surely something ought to be done by the Ministry to let the public know if anything can be done with regard to these unemployable men. It is a happy thing that the Ministry of Labour seems to be more progressive in its ideas about the juveniles than the Board of Education.
I promised that I would give some figures in regard to the territorial distribution of unemployment, and also the trade distribution. In Bedfordshire, the figure was 4.2, in Berkshire 2.9, in Buckinghamshire 2, in Cambridge 3.4, and, when we come to Durham, it is 22.5; in Bishop Auckland 42, and in Manchester 49.3. The figures for London are deceptive. The average for London is 4.5, but in Poplar it is 11.4, so that the figures for London altogether are deceptive, unless they are analysed in relation to the areas concerned. For Edinburgh the figure is 8.1, and for the Leith portion of Edinburgh no less than 14.3. These figures should weigh with the House with regard to the future. Seeing that no one can tell us how many men in Scotland go off extended benefit on to the Poor Law and how much this costs the ratepayer now as against the taxpayer, I wish to say a few words on the subject. Hon. Members sitting above the Gangway are committed officially to the policy of the new Bill.

Mr. BATEY: No, no!

Mr. BROWN: I understood the Labour party was committed to it. If not, I am very glad to have that assurance.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: Why was the hon. Member of that opinion?

Mr. BROWN: I understood there had been a party meeting to discuss the matter and that the decision of the three who signed the Report had been ratified by the party meeting. I am very glad to know now that I have been misinformed.

Mr. RICHARDSON: We will oppose it more strongly than you.

Mr. BROWN: If the hon. Member will oppose it more strongly than I shall, he will be very strong indeed about it. I did not make my remark in a party sense. Wise though many of the recommendations of the Blanesburgh Committee were, that Committee did not give sufficient attention to the needs of these areas and the size of the unemployment problem inside the unemployment figures given in the Abstract. I hope that before the Bill becomes a draft the Minister will see that regard is had to the problem of extended benefit and that of disallowances.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir VIVIAN HENDERSON: The right hon. Member for Preston (Mr. T. Shaw) made some reference to the training and employment of disabled men, and it is only right that some statement should be made before we rise for the Recess on the progress of the work of the King's Roll and the employment of disabled men. We have had no statement on this question this Session, and it is only right that the House should be informed of the progress, and it is also helpful from the point of view of the Roll. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that, as he probably knows quite well, the King's Roll Council does not deal actually with the training of disabled men as such. Therefore, it must be difficult for me to answer in any detail the question that he raises. But as the matter is one which indirectly concerns the employment of disabled men, I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that the problem of training disabled men in the Government instructional factories is and always was regarded as a temporary one, and it is natural that the estimate for such training should, as time proceeds, steadily become smaller. The number of men who now are still entitled to training is. I believe, less than 100, and therefore it is obvious that the amount of money required will become less. But the fact remains that over 100,000 disabled men have been trained in Government instructional factories, and the vast majority have not only obtained employment, but the percentage of unemployment amongst them, on inquiry made not very long ago, is considerably less than the average percentage of unemployment amongst men working in similar trades.
With regard to the employment of disabled men, I would like to inform the House what the present position is, without giving too many figures. At the present time there are in employment about 380,000 disabled men, and those men are employed by about 27,500 different firms. The number of men in employment has been steadily increasing for some months, whilst the number of firms who employ them is more or less stationary. The explanation of that is two-fold. One is that on a percentage system, which is the system on which we work, when trade improves, as it has improved recently, you naturally get a larger number of disabled men taken on by the same firms. The other reason is that, immediately after the War, when this scheme was first started, a large number of small employers, from patriotic and other motives, came on to the Roll. When trade slumped and we had a very bad period of unemployment, a lot of those employers either went bankrupt, or amalgamated with other firms, or found that they could not any longer afford to employ disabled men. Those small firms have dropped out. On the other hand there have come on to the Roll a large number of big firms who were not on the Roll when the scheme was first launched. The prime reason of that is the insistence by the Government—an insistence which was enforced by this House and by another place, as Members will remember—that in the giving of Government contracts preference must always be given to firms which are on the Roll. I am glad to say that that system has been extended to very nearly 600 local authorities up and down the country, the bulk of them the larger local authorities, who, of course, are the most important from that point of view.
Apart from that side of the question, the National Council have done their best to try to take different groups of employers, and have approached them either by letter or in person to induce them to show a more active interest in the work of the Roll. In the first place, with regard to local authorities, the number of enrolments has increased from 1391 to 1528 since January of this year. There are at present fewer than 40 local authorities of any appreciable size who ought to be and are not on the Roll. That shows very considerable progress so far
as the local authorities are concerned. All the local authorities in London are now on the Roll. With regard to Royal Warrant holders, there are 652 on the Roll and only 30 of any appreciable size not on the Roll, although we think they ought to be. With regard to public utility companies, the House will remember that in reference to a Bill promoted by one particular company some time ago we took action of a nature which had the result of bringing a large number of other public utility companies on to the Roll. It was only right that that action should have been taken, because the public utility companies are in a privileged position, and are therefore under some obligation to the State with regard to the employment of disabled men.
We endeavoured to make a special canvass of these companies last year, but unfortunately our canvass started at the same time as the industrial trouble, and we had to hold it up until the beginning of this year. Since then we have made considerable progress, and there are now 368 public utility companies on the Roll. There are still over 100 not on the Roll who probably ought to be, because of their size. But it is not possible sometimes to establish the actual position with regard to the number of men employed until careful inquiries have been made. Therefore it is not right for me to say that other public utility companies are not on the Roll and ought to be. I hope, however, that before the year is over it may be possible to state an exact figure with regard to the number of public utility companies which we consider are not fulfilling their obligations. There is one batch of employers —if I may use such a word—who, in the opinion of the Council, are not fulfilling their obligations towards disabled men. I refer to some of the large hotels. Some time ago, in a similar Debate to this, one hon. Member made a statement to that effect, and he was afterwards accused outside of having exaggerated. As a matter of fact there was no exaggeration at all.
The big railway hotels are, of course, all on the Roll, in virtue of the undertaking given by the chief railway companies. A large number of the best-known and biggest London hotels are also on the Roll. Apart from that, there is
still a very considerable body of hotels, both in London and in the provinces, which decline to have anything to do with the idea of employing disabled men, and it is very difficult to bring pressure to bear on that particular body of employers, because public opinion has very little influence on them. Hotels in London do not cater for people living in London but for people living in the provinces or visitors from overseas, and in the same way hotels in the provinces do not cater for people in the provinces, but probably more especially for people from London. In the season they have no difficulty in filling themselves with visitors. Members of this House often have very considerable influence, and it might be possible to bring some pressure on some of these hotels. A hotel which in many ways is in a specially good position to help a highly disabled man should not decline to make any effort towards a solution of the problem.
The House might be interested to know that there are 11 undertakings now being subsidised or assisted by the Treasury, undertakings which specially cater for highly disabled men who cannot normally be expected to find employment in industry. Those undertakings are employing about 650 disabled men between them. It has been decided to make a special effort. in London to find employment in the City for certain types of men who are suitable for employment either as doorkeepers or messengers, or on clerical work. We are making a special register of men in all the districts of London outside the City, and we are taking those lists down to the City and trying to get certain organisations or certain individuals to find employment for the men. The system employed is very much the same as immediately after the War. All the various trades in the country undertook to give training to a certain number of men. Before they did that, we set up special panels, to interview the men and to decide whether they could possibly be found employment after they had been trained
I wish to refer to the actual extent of the problem. I have said that the number of men who are in employment is about 380,000. Speaking from memory, the total number of men in receipt of pensions is about
500,000. From that number we have to deduct men who are in institutions or are under treatment by the Ministry, men who are living overseas but in receipt of pensions, men who are working on their own, or men who are working for employers who employ so few men that they do not come on the Roll—that is to say, fewer than 20. If you make those deductions and, if at the same time you allow for the fact that we count as disabled a man who is disabled when he first goes into employment, and gets better but remains in that same employment, you come to a figure of, roughly, about 400,000 men or slightly more. Therefore, we are within an appreciable distance of the solution of the problem.
The figure which I have given is fortified by the fact that the monthly statistics of unemployment among disabled men at present show a figure of 17,785, and that figure has steadily dropped ever since the work of the King's Roll began. When that work began, the problem was one of 65,000 men; the number has since dropped to 17,700 men. I would like to mention as a remarkable fact that during the industrial troubles of last year, although the figure of unemployment among disabled men rose, like all figures of unemployment, immediately after the trouble and went on rising until the end of June, after that period, although the unemployment figures over the whole country continued to be bad, the unemployment figures of disabled men began to improve and have gone on improving up to the present time. We have found from inquiry that not only do disabled men stand a better chance of employment as compared with their fellows who are not disabled, but that it is quite wrong to think that a man who is given a job as a disabled man must necessarily remain in that job permanently. There is a continuous turnover in the employment of disabled men just as there is in the employment of ordinary men throughout the country. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) gave a graphic description of an army or unemployed men and women marching past a given point, and told us how long it would occupy, but I would remind him that it is not the case, as some people appear to think, that the same men and the same women are continually out of employment. That
is far from being the case. More than half the problem of the Employment Exchanges is not finding a job for one man or one woman but finding that particular man or woman perhaps three or four jobs, one after the other.
There is an enormous turnover in employment which cannot be helped. It affects ordinary employment, and it affects the employment of disabled men. It makes the problem of the King's Roll a continuous one, and that problem must be continuous for some years to come. I only wish that when we got a disabled man into a job he could continue in it indefinitely, but I think there is not the slightest doubt that the disabled man can claim that he gets a better chance in the matter of employment than his fellow who is not disabled. I should like to take this opportunity, on behalf of the National Council for whose work I am largely responsible, of thanking the enormous number of men all through the country who sit on King's Roll committees year in and year out, trying to help these disabled men by their personal influence, their sympathy and their practical assistance. Few realise the enormous amount of work done by these people without any thanks and often without any recognition. There are 250 local King's Roll committees in the country, and the membership of each is anything from 12 to 20, so that hon. Members will realise the great number of people who, at this distance of time from the termination of the War, are still ready to make some sacrifice for these men. It is only natural that they should do so. We in this country have done our best to help the disabled men since the end of the War, and I think we can claim that, on the whole, we have made a success of dealing with the problem. But I would ask some hon. Members here to realise that they can do much to help on this work.
If this work had not proved a success the result might have been the raising of a serious political question in this country. We all realise that that would have been fatal, but the fact remains that this is now a non-party question, and we can all help towards its solution. Many Members of this House have done a great deal to help but some have done very little. The problem of the Ministry of Labour, like the problem of the Ministry of Pensions, is a problem of getting into personal
contact with the individual. Hon. Members here who come into personal contact with large numbers of their constituents, and also with numbers of employers, can very often, by some little action, by the writing of a letter or by a personal visit, do something towards the solution of this problem which those who are working centrally in London could not do. I therefore ask hon. Members to realise that they can do much in this respect. In conclusion, I desire, as Chairman of the Estimates Committee, to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his statement that the Minister is prepared to adopt the recommendations of that Committee with regard to the classification of Employment Exchanges. I feel convinced that not only will a considerable amount of money he saved thereby, but that the convenience will be served both of the officials and of the individuals using the Exchanges.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: I do not propose to follow the hon. and gallant Gentleman who has just sat down into all the matters on which he has informed the House in regard to the disabled men. Like many other Members. I can recall when these men were told, "Go and fight for your country and a grateful country will never forget you," and in this House I have praised employers in my own county for what they did after the War in regard to disabled men. But a change has taken place and, to-day, men are being dismissed everywhere in the county of Durham. Those men who ordinarily worked in the coal trade cannot be absorbed. The Minister has told us that it is difficult to absorb even a very skilful coal hewer and it is still more difficult to absorb men of the class with which the hon. and gallant Member for Bootle (Sir V. Henderson) has been dealing. I know only too well the fairness of the Parliamentary Secretary in trying to deal with all the cases that are placed before him, but mistakes are made in his Department and I am certain that very much more could have been done to assist the County of Durham in the difficulties from which it is at present suffering. The County of Durham was formerly a rich county and into its chief industry men of all descriptions were absorbed and villages were built in connection with the production of coal, but now those villages, so far as industry is concerned, are almost deserted and black despair is everywhere.
I listened attentively to the Parliamentary Secretary and when he told us that things were better than they had been I wondered where we came in. It cannot be said that we are any better in Durham. We are practically down and out. I hoped that as he went on he would tell us of some very handsome measure of help to be given to counties like Durham and places like South Wales which have been so hardly hit. But apparently nothing of this kind is being done. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) read a statement from the Blanesburgh Report about men walking from one place to another seeking work where there is no work. We have been told about the difficulty of absorbing these men in any work except their own and yet because they do not go from place to place seeking work where there is no work, they are struck off the unemployment benefit and thrown on to the rates. That policy is not going to help industry in Durham or any other county. Every time a man is struck off unemployment benefit anti placed on the rates, up go the rates; the cost of production is increased and industry is further restricted. Pit after pit is closing down and so we are gradually getting less and less employment in the county. We are going from bad to worse and I wish the hon. Gentleman s Department would realise what is going on and endeavour to find a remedy for it
The imposition of rates, which comes under the heading of "costs other than wages." is making it impossible for many concerns to continue working. Rates that were formerly a few pence are now double that number of shillings in some areas. The Poor Rate has gone up, the highway rate has also been increasing and yet we have the Chancellor of the Exchequer taking away from the Road Fund money which might have been applied to the roads of the county. When we see such things we wonder what is going to happen in the near future. Rates that. were 4d. are now 5s. and rates that were 3d. are now 1s. 6d. How can industry bear up under present conditions if such heavy burdens are thrown upon it? I am firmly convinced that much could be done to restore the coal trade if this Government were inclined to do it. I have worked in the coal trade and I have known the coal trade since I was 9 years of age. and I have watched its development.
When I was a boy I knew my employer, but to-day all that is changed. A company has no soul. It seeks its dividends first and foremost and the workers must take what is left. I say that many of our mines are being managed to death. There are nearly as many men with big salaries hanging on to; the mines as there used to be men working in the mines. They ought to inquire into that sort of thing. Again, may I say to them that we have mines in the county of Durham where it does not make any difference to the employer whether he gets a penny out of them or not, because he has other industries out of which he makes his profit. Under the conditions in which they are placed, the miners must go down and their wages decrease. The Minister said their position was better than in 1919, but I dispute that. The coal-hewers' average in 1919 was somewhere in the region of between 20s. and 21s. a day, but to-day it is 8s. 2d.

Mr. BETTERTON: I hope the hon. Member did not misunderstand me. I was not referring to any particular industry, either coal mining or any other, but I said industry as a whole. I am not in a position to dispute, affirm, or deny what he is saying with regard to the position in the coal-mining industry as compared with previous years, because I have not got the figures before me.

Mr. RICHARDSON: I am glad to have that explanation, because at least the miners are in a worse position to-day than ever before. I have worked at coal-mining all my life, and I never knew a worse time than the present. Let the hon. Gentleman remember that it is a question not so much of how much a day a man may earn as of how often he is allowed to work during the week. Lost time counts very little in a man's earnings, and we can see evidences of poverty in the whole district by looking at the wan faces of the bootless and ill-fed bairns, who have deteriorated even since December, 1926, and have been growing worse every day. Let the Government remember that coal-mining is an industry which this country cannot afford to lose, for coal is our chief article of exportation, and if coal is not to be exported, God help all the other industries. It other industries are prospering, I am very glad of it, but it is not reasonable to
ask the coal industry to make the tremendous sacrifice that it has been making. It is unfair, it is unreasonable, it is unthinkable. I am absolutely convinced that if the Government had set their minds to work to alter the conditions in the coal-mining industry, if they had accepted Mr. Justice Sankey's Report some years ago, or even if the last Report had been acted upon, things would have been very different. Until there is nationalisation of the industry, or a great combination in the industry—a thing, I know, which is dangerous in the hands of employers and capitalists—but if it were In the hands of the country, I am certain that things would have been different. Let it be remembered that the mine that does not pay is not always the worst mine or the worst managed mine, and——

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER (Captain FitzRoy): With the exception of unemployment in the coal trade, the hon. Member would not be in order in discussing the conditions of that industry.

Mr. RICHARDSON: I think things could be amended by administrative action without legislation, and it is the administration with which I am dealing, rather than asking for new legislation, but the statement made by the Minister has left me in blank despair. I can see no ray of hope at all, and I can see County Durham down and out. Many of the boards of guardians are already bankrupt, and what help is proposed to be given to them? I plead with the Minister to see to it that some attempt is made to revive this industry, which cannot be let down without severe detriment to this country. The Minister ought to tell his rota committees to do their work in a more humane fashion. They themselves ought to be responsible for telling men where there is work, and men ought not to be sent off to places where they know there is no work, travelling miles and miles, day after day, only to be told, what they knew before, that those employers have no work to offer. Yet these committees are throwing out these men and causing hardship in their homes. Young men who are under 25 are thrown as a burden upon their parents because they are not old enough to claim unemployment benefit.
Let the Minister ask these committees to humanise their machinery so that these people can be helped. If he does not accept my word as to the condition of the people in these mining districts, let him ask the people who have charge of the children, namely, the teachers in our schools, and they will tell him of the hungry and bootless condition of the children. Let him ask the women, and they will tell him of the sacrifices they are making, sacrifices which it is almost impossible for them to bear. If he will do that, and will give us humanity in the administration of his office, I shall be glad to have listened to this Debate.

Mr. SKELTON: I have no qualification to follow the hon. Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. R. Richardson), who has just sat down, but one never hears a speech from him without realising his immense amount of knowledge on the subject and the deep feeling with which he speaks. This afternoon we are discussing the Estimate for the Ministry which is responsible for questions connected with labour in this country—the welfare of labour, the employment of labour, and the general outlook of labour and employment in this country. If one looks at the country from the point of view of employment and of population, one thing strikes one at the outset, namely, that all the rural areas are depleted and that all the urban areas are congested. Not only is that true physically, but it is also true economically. The rural areas are depleted economically, in the sense that they are not yielding their true quota of wealth, and the urban areas are congested economically, because there is in them such a mass of population which can find no employment.
I rise this afternoon for one specific purpose, and that is to suggest to the Under-Secretary, and through him to the Minister of Labour, that the bearings of and the deductions from the facts which I have just mentioned have not been and are not being sufficiently considered by the Ministry. I know—and I want to clear the ground at once by this observation—the extent to which language which I think is foolish has been used, and hopes which I think are absurd have been raised, with regard to what is called the settlement of people on the land, and I want at the outset to make it clear that I have not in my mind, in what I am going to say now, any general or wild-cat
scheme by which huge masses of the population can be transferred from urban to rural conditions. That kind of language, however suitable it may be for some persons on the platform, is entirely unsuitable, as it seems to me, in the serious consideration which must be given in this House to real problems, such consideration being the only kind of contribution which it is worth while any hon. Member attempting to make.
It is a very remarkable fact that, although there have been since the War a very large experience and much information with regard to settling people on the land—experience which is entirely novel and information which is now, on the whole, easily accessible—so far as this House or the public know, there has never been any serious joint consideration of the problem by the Ministries affected, namely, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Labour, and, to some extent, the Ministry of Health. So far as I know, there has been no serious effort made to see how far there is any possibility, through resettlement on the land, of any approach to a solution, even of the most partial kind, of the unemployment problem in this country. Since the War, and still more since the effects of the 1919 settlement have become known, I know of absolutely no attempt which has been made to study the lessons of that scheme, which, the House will recollect, involved the settlement upon the land of 17,000 persons in England and some 3,000 persons in Scotland. I know of no serious effort which has been made to try and derive any real lessons from that great work, so expensive, so elaborate, and, as I believe, so successful; and I want to suggest to the Under-Secretary that that great work enables one to draw two lessons which, from his point of view, are, I believe, of immense value.
6.0 p.m.
The first is that, if you get men of suitable character and personality, they can, under suitable conditions, make good as smallholders upon the land, although their previous experience has been urban. That is a new fact. It is something which a few years ago, speaking personally, I should not have believed. But I think it is now a settled fact that if you get men of suitable personality and character the absence of previous rural experience
does not prevent them making good as smallholder in suitable conditions. That is the first fact. The second fact is hardly less important, when one is trying to deal with this question from the practical point of view. Startling evidence now exists as to the success which a man of suitable character and personality may make as a smallholder although the capital resources at his command be exiguous in the extreme. Either of those two facts alone should be of vital interest to the Ministry of Labour, but taken in conjunction they surely make the question of land settlement one which ought to be constantly within the purview of the Ministry of Labour. Having stated these two propositions, I think it is only right that I should indicate the authority upon which I am giving them. I do not suppose there has been any public document which has been more completely neglected than the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries' Report upon Land Settlement in England and Wales between 1919 and 1924. I never knew anybody except myself who read it. I have never heard anybody quote it in this House.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston).

Mr. SKELTON: He has read everything; he must be excepted; but certainly very few have read it, and I think the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston) will agree with me that considering the importance and the novelty of much of the matter it contains it is a State Paper which has been singularly neglected and disregarded. I draw attention to it for this reason. In this large Report there is one part, Part II, which is headed "Notes on some successful ex-service small holdings," and which extends over pages 54 to 61. There 27 examples are given. They have not been selected with any desire to show that urban training is not a bar to success. The Ministry of Agriculture would have no object in drawing any such deduction, but out of the 27 examples drawn from all quarters of England and Wales there are some three or four which show that men of urban training—in more than one case men who prior to the War had been miners—have made good on small holdings. I wish to give one example, because I think it is of real importance to do so.
If the Parliamentary Secretary will look at Example 19, for instance, he will find that it deals with the case of a man who was the son of a miner and had himself worked in a pit and in the office of a colliery company, and who had no previous agricultural experience. At the time he took the holding he had £100 in cash and he was granted a loan of £100. The report goes on:
This tenant by his own labour sank a well 31 feet deep and also spent £40 on the purchase of Army huts, which he converted for the purpose of keeping his stock. Pigs have been the basis of this man's success. …. He keeps five cows and has worked op a lucrative milk round. Poultry keeping also adds to his profits, while a portion of the holding is devoted to market gardening, the produce being sold locally.
I venture to draw particular attention to this point, because this is what has happened in his case between 1921 and 1924:
The tenant has repaid the loan of £100, and his cash and stock now amount to between £400 and £500.
I need not give any more examples from the four or five others out of the 27 given in this part of the Report. If one takes any trouble to go round small holdings settlements and become acquainted with the men, it is not long before one meets with other examples of exactly the same thing. Only the week before last I was looking over a settlement for disabled ex-service men in Midlothian, some six miles from Edinburgh. One of the most successful men, a man so successful that the Board of Agriculture in Scotland are constantly showing him off to inquiring strangers as the type of the really successful smallholder, was a man whose whole previous life had been spent at sea and who, when he went on to the holding, did not know a hen from an albatross. I do not know whether the hon. Member for Dundee is going to speak on this subject this afternoon, or whether his lines are cast in other places, but there would be nobody better than he, with his great knowledge of this subject, to back up what I am trying to say.
If it be true that experiences with post-War land settlement clearly show that so far as certain rural pursuits are concerned the man of urban training, if he be of the right personality and the right character, can succeed, surely the
Ministry of Labour, in their capacity as the guardians of labour and the guardians of employment, and having regard to the fact that an unemployment figure of something like 1,000,000 appears to be our lot, ought to realise that these schemes of land settlement demand their closest care.
I think it is remarkable that, so far as is known, there has been no real consultation between the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Agriculture. In charitable affairs it is all very well not to let your right hand know what your left hand is doing, but it seems to me to be amazing and supine to a degree that all this new information, all these new facts, all this experience should be left alone and disregarded as if it were of no importance at all. I venture to suggest that before this year has passed the whole energy of the Ministry of Labour should be turned upon a really wide consideration of the problem I have tried to indicate. This is no question for legislation at the moment. Only last year an Act was passed whereby the Treasury undertakes to spend £2,000,000 in the next six years on making up deficiencies in the settlement of people on small holdings. Everybody who knows or cares anything about the subject knows that the Treasury have told the Ministry of Agriculture to go slow, so that that money shall not be spent. Everybody knows it. I think if the Ministry of Agriculture are left to themselves they will not be able to make head against the Treasury, but I think it is perfectly certain that if the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Labour put their heads together and consider the question fully and carefully a case will be made out—not from the mere rural point of view but from the point of view of urban conditions—for the development of land settlement in this country which will be strong enough to beat down the resistance of even the most determined Treasury official.
Some of my friends in the House know that I have been interested in this subject of land settlement, devoted to it, for a number of years, but what has been new to me are these facts which I have mentioned, and which I think the Ministry of Labour entirely disregard, namely, that we can no longer pretend that urban people are not suitable to
be smallholders—given the conditions I refer to—and that the lack of large sums of money is not a bar. I hope I am not wandering too far from the subject in what I am going to say, but I do not think the House and the country fully realise the possible effect upon unemployment as a whole of carrying out consistently, steadily and wisely a scheme of land settlement. It is not merely that you remove individuals from urban employment and put them into rural employment, leaving a job for another urban man, but I think it is beyond doubt that colonies of smallholders, once they become established, create a demand for urban produce which is a valuable element in re-establishing and enlarging the home market. Anyone who goes to any of the well-known settlements and follows the course of the life of the men there cannot fail to see that there is hardly any class of man who spends more of his income on the purchase of manufactured goods than the smallholder. I will not develop that theme, because I think it is perfectly obvious.
Let me say further that I congratulate the Ministry on their plans for extending the training places. I think it is a very great mistake to concentrate mainly upon training men for migration overseas. The first job we have to do in colonisation is the recolonisation of England and Scotland. That is the real job. I do not very often address this House for a long time, but I am anxious to say one or two words more. During my own investigations few things have interested me more than the number of men found on small holdings who had intended originally to go overseas. If there are present any hon. Members who went with me last summer on a visit to a large number of small holdings in the home counties, they will recollect our experience at a settlement near Croydon, where out of some 30 settlers no fewer than two were found—doing well—who told us that their original intention had been to go to Australia, but that as their wives and families disliked the complete separation from home they had taken a small holding near Croydon. Can it he doubted that there is exactly double the advantage to this nation in
colonising a man six miles from Croydon as compared with colonising a man in Australia? The wealth he produces on his holding is wealth made and kept inside the four corners of this country, and the manufactured goods which he must have and which he buys are bought from people in this country. The advantage is exactly double.

Mr. JOHNSTON: May I ask the hon. Member if he would add that there are far fewer failures?

Mr. SKELTON: I am much obliged to my hon. Friend. The figure relating to failures, which I think I have correctly in my mind, is a startling one. I am putting it rather higher than that. Taking settlement in England as a whole, I am going to put the maximum figure at l0 per cent., which I admit could be reduced. In Scotland I would take a smaller maximum figure of 5 per cent. At any rate, I will leave it at that. Looking at this question broadly, in Australia and Canada I should think the percentage of failures must be about 34 or 35 per cent. If you take that 10 per cent. and analyse it properly in regard to real economic failures, I agree that the figure will be very much lower than 10 per cent, There is no question that the evidence now shows that land settlement in this country is far more likely to succeed than in the. Dominions. The point I am trying to make is this: Here is a vastly congested urban population, and an empty land. These facts lie patently before us, and they show that under suitable conditions one can no longer say, as I myself have freely said in the past, that you must have previous rural experience in life before you can make a success on the land. I ask the Minister of Labour seriously to face this problem, which, I think, has been absolutely neglected.
May I here relate the story of the processionary caterpillar which, it is said at a certain stage of its existence goes off to an unknown destination? Some naturalists hold that every year that pro-cessionary caterpillar has some definite object in view, and knows where it is going. A distinguished naturalist got a column of these animals and put them on the rim of a flower pot, and they marched round and round the flower pot rim for eight days. From that experiment this distinguished naturalist drew the conclusion
that the processionary caterpillar did not know where it was, or where it was going. Far be it from me to suggest that the policy of the Minister of Labour is to be compared with the processionary caterpillar, but I think the time has come when, if he cannot get off the rim of the flower pot, the right hon. Gentleman should occasionally look over the edge, and then he will see that his Department is only dealing with one-half of their task, and he should consider very fully whether it is not possible, even to some small extent, to relieve urban congestion by once again repopulating the fields of England and Scotland.

Miss WILKINSON: I think the last speaker, by his example of the processionary caterpillar, has provided us with an excellent illustration for use on various platforms. In a Debate like this some hon. Members come forward with prepared speeches to fire off at the Minister in order to get a reply from him. I am an exception to that rule. All I wish to do is to put two points before the Minister of Labour, one with regard to the heavy iron and steel industry, and another with regard to the training centres for women workers in this country. With regard to the heavy iron and steel industry, in one of the areas which I represent in this House, Middlesbrough, the position is becoming so bad that it does really call for more attention on the part of the Minister of Labour than he has yet seen fit to give to it. We have in Middlesbrough 12,000 persons over 18 years of age who are unemployed in the iron and steel industry. During the miners' lock-out nearly 10,000 out of those 12,000 persons were unemployed. To-day they have fallen to what is considered locally normal unemployment, and the figure is 1,900. That is 17 per cent. of the adult males employed in the staple trade. In face of those figures, hon. Members will realise the appalling situation in that area.
It is quite true that at the beginning of this year extra furnaces were put into blast for carrying out replacement orders. But that was a mere flash in the pan, and we are now getting back to a worse state of unemployment. I ask the Minister of Labour to regard this position of unemployment as very specifically
a Government responsibility. It is more so in this case than in many other trades, because this particular position was definitely created by the action of the Government during the War, when these men were trained to make munitions in those particular areas, and after the War they were left there. Consequently, the iron and steel industries were inflated to an abnormal extent in this way during the War. These men now find themselves in areas which are waterlogged with unemployment. Many of them are permanently unemployed, and the result of the unemployment insurance policy has been to throw more of these men on to the rates, and this is dragging those areas down in poverty, a poverty which is scarcely overshadowed by the tremendous problem with which we are faced in regard to the coal mines. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that things are just as bad in the areas of which I am speaking as in some of the mining districts, and unless we have some kind of Government intervention, these people will be dragged still lower down into the abyss of poverty.
I would like the Minister of Labour to make a statement as to what is the policy of the Government with regard to the women in the training centres. We have in industry a very much higher percentage of women than we had previous to the War. The figures in regard to unemployment in the case of women are still appallingly high, and that is partly due to the fact that so many of the normal channels of women's industry are overcrowded and the new channels are closed. Many of the industries into which the women entered during the War have, for various reasons, dispensed with the services of women, and now it is emphatically necessary, instead of having masses of untrained and unemployable women on the labour market, that something should be done to train them in various trades. A large number of these women lost their opportunity for training while they were on munition work. I know the Minister of Labour attempted to meet this position by giving grants to local training centres. Up to now 36,000, or nearly 37,000, have passed through the home training courses. In addition to that, some very valuable instruction was given to women in various skilled occupations. I have here a list
of some of the skilled occupations in which women have been trained. No less than 348 were trained for clerical work, 73 were trained as cooks, every one of whom has secured employment, some as comptometer operators and a large number as shorthand-typists, children's nurses, hairdressers, and so on. The scheme of the Minister of Labour was partly to train women who desired to follow some unskilled occupation and partly to train those who desired skilled occupations. Those centres for the training of women have been an unqualified success. A very large proportion of the women who have passed through those centres have good jobs to-day, and I regret to say that practically every year the right hon. Gentleman has cut down the grants for this service. The grants have been cut down almost every year during the Last three years.
The cutting down of the grants means that those centres have had to close down during the summer months. The effect of that is that those centres lose the services of a very highly skilled staff. As a matter of fact, this is false economy because, having got together a staff of people suitable to get the very best results from these girls, because it is impossible to offer the staff 52 weeks' work this skilled staff is dissipated, and the local committees have to engage another staff for the winter months. I think that policy is penny wise and pound foolish. It is a pity that so few have been trained for the higher-skilled occupations. Surely it would be a much better policy, instead of paying out unployed benefit week after week, to train as many of these people as possible for some definite, skilled occupation, or domestic work for those who prefer it.
I do not agree that every woman should be pushed into domestic work. I know what an appalling failure I should be in domestic work, and I shudder to imagine the effect on a household in which I was pushed as an unwilling domestic worker. Nevertheless, there is a very large number of women who prefer domestic work, and a very large number of women has been trained for domestic service in these centres. The result has been that they have got higher remuneration and they have raised the whole standard of domestic service. It has often been
assumed that those who took up domestic service were social outcasts, or something definitely inferior to other people, but those women who have been trained in the Women's Employment Centres have shown that as trained workers they can demand certain standards of wages, in return for which they give highly skilled work. This is a highly important national work, and to cut it down by a pettifogging few thousand pounds is, to my mind, false economy
For these reasons, I ask the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider the whole question of the grants to the Central Committee for Women's Training. I agree that this is not going to solve the unemployment problem, and it is only one plaster on many running sores. Where there is a definite constructive piece of work, taking women away from that hopeless wandering round looking for employment, and standing outside the Employment Exchanges, with all the mental and moral deterioration which that means, surely it is better for the Minister of Labour to reconsider this matter and see whether a more substantial sum cannot be given to carry on the work of the Central Committee for Women's Training and Employment.

Mr. MERRIMAN: I desire to reinforce what has just been said by the hon. Member for East Middlesbrough (Miss Wilkinson) with regard to the maintenance of these training centres, particularly the centres for training in domestic service. I agree with every word that the hon. Lady said, and with her appeal to the Minister to maintain this grant at least to its present extent. It has been represented to me from Manchester that even the reduction which took place last year has resulted in the cutting down of staffs, and, in one or two cases in that district, not only in the dispersal of staff, but the sale of furniture and effects and so forth, and a general disturbance of the work. It goes without saying that some stability in this matter is essential if the training centres are to be effective, and I want to make an alternative suggestion to the Minister of Labour, which does not, it is true, depend on him alone, but which would require the co-operation of the Minister of Health.
I should like to suggest that domestic training at one of these centres should be made a benefit under the unemployment Insurance Act. I do not suppose that that is a matter about which a decision can be given off-hand, but, as the hon. Member for East Middlesbrough has just said, this training in domestic service effects a thoroughly useful purpose; it has been proved to be a success. It is manifest that the ordinary private registry cannot act as a training centre, and it is equally obvious that the employment exchange is the worst possible form of registry for domestic service, because, in a form of employment which involves in so great a degree the personal relation, the employment exchange cannot possible be an efficient registry office. The master or mistress, on the one hand, cannot really, from the employment exchange, get to know anything about the person who is to be employed, and, what is still more important, the applicant for employment cannot learn from the employment exchange the sort of home into which she will be going.

Mr. KELLY: Why not?

Mr. MERRIMAN: What I am suggesting is that the sort of investigations which are desirable before the relationship of master and servant in domestic service is entered into would be very much better made through the medium of one of these training centres, because the training centre itself will combine the functions both of training, which the private registry office cannot possibly carry out, and of the registry, which it will be better able to carry out than the employment exchange, since it will be, and ought to be, its duty to have the best means of getting to know the sort of homes to which its candidates are being sent.

Mr. KELLY: May I suggest that in London it has been clone for years with regard to domestic service in connection with the employment exchanges?

Mr. MERRIMAN: I dare say it has been done, but it is not a question whether it has or has not been done; I am suggesting that it can be much better done through the medium of a training centre, where the person in charge of the training centre knows exactly what are the qualifications of the person whom she is launching into
domestic service, and can make it her business at the same time to inquire rigidly into the nature of the homes to which she is sending those who are so employed. It is not a question whether it can be done through the employment exchange, but whether it cannot be better done by combining the activities of the registry and of the employment exchange in the training centre. I invite my right hon. Friend to give sympathetic consideration to this matter, because, after all, domestic service is the one branch of employment in which the demand for labour is, apparently, inexhaustible.

Mr. HUGH EDWARDS: It was very gratifying to learn from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour earlier in the Debate that there has been a perceptible improvement in the industrial situation during the first six months of this year as compared with the corresponding period of last year. I think, however, that the appeal made by the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton), under cover of his illustration of the caterpillar, when he asked the Minister of Labour to cease going round the rim of the flower-pot and to look over the edge, might he made, not only to the Minister of Labour, but with equal force and relevance to the whole House. I remember my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas) declaring on one occasion that we are much too apt to forget that the problem of unemployment is not a party question but a national question in the widest sense. Reference has been made in these recent speeches to training centres, and I think it was recognised by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Preston (Mr. T. Shaw) that the Ministry of Labour is doing its utmost for the improvement of these training centres. But, even if the Minister succeeded in perfecting these centres of training, it would leave untouched the crucial problem of unemployment.
It is well that we should realise that unemployment in its essence is not so much a political problem as an economic problem. It is quite true that it is no new problem. We had unemployment in pre-War times, but the pre-War unemployment was marked by two characteristics. There was what was called the cyclical unemployment, which, at
irregular periods, afflicted industries which were regarded as stable. It was primarily due to the fact that the markets were not able to absorb the products at the prices demanded. There was a glut in the market, and, until that glut was removed, unemployment existed in the industry. Then there was a second type of unemployment in pre-War times, the seasonal unemployment, when periods followed each other with fair regularity. Price entered less as a factor into such unemployment than fashion, and, in outdoor trades, the weather.
The sinister significance of unemployment in these post-War days, as compared with pre-War unemployment, is that it is becoming chronic. The early mists with which we were familiar in pie-War times have now developed into a dense fog, which shows no sign of lifting. The reason for this is obvious; I think that every Member of the House realises it. We have learned already that the source of unemployment is not merely national in its origin and in its operation, but international; I think that that is fully recognised; and for that reason, as I think it is only fair to realise, and as everyone must realise, no Government can be responsible for the prevalence of unemployment. You may have the most perfect government in the world, but it cannot direct and regulate international forces any more than it can direct and regulate the weather. That was the great lesson which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Preston learned when he declared that he could not produce schemes like rabbits out of a hat. I think that that was a very good phrase, and it has this advantage arid distinction, that it has now passed into the currency of political phraseology. The right hon. Gentleman was quite correct. There are international forces at work which cannot be regulated by any Government, however perfect it may be. In a Report submitted to the Management Committee of the General Federation of Trade Unions, there occurred this suggestive sentence, which I should like to bring to the attention of the House:
It is of no use appealing to Parliament for a solution of this problem. The industries must themselves find a solution, or jeopardise their existence.
I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Labour a very practical
and valuable suggestion which was made by Mr. Appleton some time ago. He advocated the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry, to consist of expert economists, bankers who have a knowledge of international finance, merchants with a knowledge of overseas trade, and trade union officials. I think the value of a Commission of that type is self-evident, because it is admitted that there are circumstances which predispose to unemployment, there are circumstances which precipitate unemployment, and there are circumstances which perpetuate unemployment; and the question is, which are which? Which are the circumstances that produce the one, and which are the circumstances that produce the other? I think it would be of service to the Minister of Labour if he could get together a joint Commission of this kind, in order that they might make a full and exhaustive inquiry into the various causes and forces that are at work. I would remind the House that in industry, as in medicine, you cannot effect a cure until you know the causes, both direct and indirect, and I venture to suggest that what is wanted to-day in industry is a scientific diagnosis of the disorder and of the malady.
I do not think that anyone is likely to under-estimate the tragedy of the situation. I find that the latest returns show that, on the 18th of this month, the number on the registers of Employment Exchanges was 1,048,000. It is true that that figure is 580,000 less than the number on the registers at this time last year, but the gratification at that fact is discounted by the further fact that there were 11,400 more than in the preceding week, so that during this past month there has, unfortunately, been an increase. One can see the gravity of the situation by what is happening in London now. No doubt hon. Members have seen the statement in the newspapers that from South Wales hundreds of colliers who have been thrown out of work have come up to London—a large number of them have walked, by day and by night—in the hope of finding work in Piccadilly in connection with the tearing up of the road. I think some came from the north as well, but hundreds came from South Wales. They were able to work, willing to work, eager to work, and yet were unable to find work there. That fact brings home to us the
gravity and the tragedy of the situation; and, after all, there are effects of unemployment which can never be tabulated in statistical returns. The most sinister and the most tragic fact of all is that the unemployed are in danger of becoming unemployable.
I think it would really pay us if the suggestion made by an hon. Member above the Gangway were carried out, and men who had grown too old to work should be pensioned off in order to provide employment for the younger men. Surely it is not too much to hope that this country, which in a time of great emergency showed itself capable of rising to its opportunity and face a most perilous situation with unyielding tenacity of purpose, can address itself to this great question. Talking about training centres and so forth is merely dealing with the fringe of it. We should all like to see the Government make a strong, resolute, determined effort to deal with the problem in its essence and do something to banish the spectre out of the land, and I hope the Minister will be able to say he is doing something more than dealing with the fringe of the question. Let us get this Joint Commission. Let us have this scientific diagnosis of the causes, and once we have a scientific statement of the real causes of the malady we are on the way to a suggestion of the remedy, and I therefore make a strong appeal to him to do what he can and to bring all the resources of his Department to bear on the subject so that we shall have the satisfaction of knowing that in this country, at any rate, a grim and resolute effort is being made to deal with the problem.

Major GLYN: The hon. Member has said that training centres are not really tackling the problem properly, and I am inclined to agree, but I want to ask hon. Members opposite to give credit, at any rate, where credit is due, and credit is due to the Ministry of Labour and to those who are in charge of two very wonderful stations where men who are unemployed can get training that qualifies them for work oversea. I regret bitterly that the Exchequer has been sufficiently powerful to cut down that grant. If ever there was a foolish time to cut down a grant of that sort, it is now. I think I can say it is not at all the wish of the Minister of Labour, who
is personally very keen on this work, and I believe instead of spending £13,000 less we ought to have spent £130,000 more. In Canada, which you may take as one useful example, it is only possible to give assisted passages to men who are qualified to go on to the land, because Canada cannot absorb people except for work on the land. Therefore, if you can get men who in the first or second generation only are removed from the land, and give them an opportunity of going to these training centres and familiarising themselves with the equipment and methods of farming that obtain in Canada and Australia, they are then able to get the benefit of assisted passages. It seems to me this is not in the least a question of party. It is a question of everyone uniting to assist men who, through no fault of their own, but owing to circumstances of industry, notably in the coal trade, are unable to find work here, and although some might be able to get on the land in this country there is no doubt at all that if they went to Canada or Australia they could get on to the land, and at once start getting tolerably good income. Last year I had an opportunity of meeting in Canada one or two persons who had been through the training centre at Ipswich, and it is only right, as civil servants are unable to speak on their own behalf, that when one comes across the product of their work one should pay some small tribute to it. The officers who do their work quietly at Claydon and Brandon do not get much credit and do not very often see the result of it, and when I saw those men and talked to them I realised how very efficient and very excellent has been the work at those two training places.
There is one point on this that I should Like to emphasise, and if it he possible for the Overseas Settlement Committee to back it up, as I believe they would do, and also the High Commissioners both of Australia and Canada, it is quite possible to cut down the period of so-called training to an even shorter time, because, obviously, the shorter the period at these places the larger the number of men who will pass through. We had an opportunity of discussing matters with the Canadian Minister of Immigration, and he told us quite clearly that the Dominion Government would not be willing to alter the conditions as regards assisted passages, and therefore it is surely up to us
to develop this opening, so that men who are in other industries can get some sort of training in the rudiments of agriculture as practised in those two Dominions. The Member for one of the Divisions of Bristol has made the suggestion in the Press that if the Government are really sincere in wishing to get men employment we should definitely offer them employment at a fixed rate of wage, their passage, their food, and their clothing, to do work abroad and be brought back, if they so wish, to this country at the end of a definite period. When I first heard that scheme, I thought it would be very expensive and very difficult, but there are undoubtedly schemes which require skilled labour, and if you could recruit men here on definite conditions, so that they could go to one of the Crown Colonies or Dominions and do a specific job of work and be returned to this country on its completion, not only would the British Empire gain by great works being carried through which otherwise would not be done, but you would give definite employment to men who are not shirkers or malingerers at all, who hate far more than the people who condemn them being on the unemployment donation, and are only anxious, if they possibly can, to get work that suits them. It is very difficult to raise these matters in the House on the appropriate Vote and, as regards this particular instance, while it arises on the Ministry of Labour, I know other Departments are interested in it, and I believe the Board of Trade and the Treasury could perfectly well find out from the Dominions what are the specific works that require skilled British labour, and then see whether voluntary schemes of this sort could not be attempted on the guarantee of the Government as to the rate of pay, the length of time the men would be serving and the conditions of their employment, and let them return to this country or remain in the Dominions as they please. If they remained in the Dominions the money that would have been spent in returning to this country could be given them as a start in their new life.
These two points about recruiting temporary labour for specific purposes and the training of labour to go permanently out to the Dominions and work on the land deserve the attention of the House.
As regards the two training centres at Claydon and Brandon, I think they should be increased, and similar stations should be established in other parts of the country. What is more, we should make it our business, as far as we can, to go to those areas where men are anxious to get work and give them what information we can as to what steps they should take to be in a position to qualify to go to these training places and then go overseas. But it is no use going to a town dweller whose father and grandfather have left the land. What one has to do is to get the men who have still the love of the land in their blood. There are many of them who have drifted into the towns in the early part of the century and the last century, and who now can find no work there. Those men will take to the land again quite easily. It is no use sending to Canada or Australia the type of man who has no love of the country and likes the hard pavements and the lights of the cinema, because you may train him in the station and put him on the land anywhere and he will always drift back to the town. Attention should be directed to those who are likely to be good candidates, and if we can concentrate on nothing else, I hope every party will urge that this is a chance which is certainly worth while. There is nothing so stupid as to cheese-pare in regard to expenditure on things that are really important. I think no one can rest content with the progress we have made, and it is up to all of us to assist the Ministry in extending and developing the stations that will train men to go overseas to find permanent employment; there.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. COVE: The few words I have to say may impress the House as being an intrusion on the main lines of the Debate, but I think the matter is one of very considerable importance. I refer to the unemployment of juveniles, especially between 14 and 16. For about 20 years now Committee after Committee has considered this problem, and yet we find ourselves in the position that no one knows how many of these juveniles are employed and how many are unemployed. No one knows the statistics of the whole situation. No one knows what kind of employment they are entering on and certainly this Government, after three years of their existence, have done
nothing effective. They have been given advice to take the children completely out of the arena of industry, keep them at school, and provide maintenance grants in necessitous cases at least. But I gather the Government have decided that they will not raise the school age, and to-day, as I understand it, we have been given by the Parliamentary Secretary an alternative policy. The Government have decided that the Ministry of Labour will be directly responsible for the choice of employment, and they are going to set up a National Advisory Committee to consider the problem of juvenile unemployment centres. We are still a, long way, even in this foreshadowed policy, from doing anything effective. The problem is imperatively urgent. It is even tragic as far as tens of thousands of them are concerned, and the only promise we have had from the Government is the setting up of machinery which will cost nothing. You cannot deal with this problem if you rule out raising the school age. You have to go a step further. You have to see, in the first place, that these unemployed youths are not a burden upon their parents, that they have sustenance and maintenance from the State during the whole period that they are unemployed. We are promised this afternoon that a National Advisory Committee is to be set up. I want to ask the Minister what is the constitution of this committee. Are we to have on it representatives of employers, of education authorities, and of teachers? What are the scope and functions of this committee to be? How quickly is it to be set up? Because the Malcolm Committee has reported some months now, and if the Ministry had been in earnest about this matter, it might have made a decision long ago. Is it to deal with the problem of the juvenile unemployment centres? If so, in what way will it deal with them? I have been watching them for some time past, and the Minister will agree with me that one of their difficulties has been their lack of stability. You cannot get any real programme, or get them doing any really creative and constructive work, if they are to be closed at a moment's notice. If we are to have the unemployment centres in place of the raising of the school age, we should
make these centres work as effectively as they possibly can. If the Minister is to do anything effective with these centres, they have got to be linked up with continuation education. They have got to be brought into contact with the main system of education of this country. They ought not to be regarded merely as clubs or as ameliorative institutions.
I am perfectly ready to give my meed of praise to what is done at the centres I have visited, and to what they have done in saving the youths from the dangers and from the deterioration that takes place when they walk about the streets. I was saying last night that I was beginning to have a little more faith in the Ministry of Labour than in the Board of Education in this matter. I observed—perhaps this is not giving very great credit to a Conservative Government—that the Ministry of Labour was much more alive than the dead Board of Education to this problem. I hope we shall hear later on from the Minister that my small faith is at last somewhat justified, and that they are prepared to extend these juvenile unemployment centres and to give them stability. I find that, as far as the teachers are concerned, teachers are not prepared to enter these juvenile unemployment centres simply because they may be closed at any time, and they may be out of employment. While I recognise that some progress has been made as far as pensions are concerned, it has not gone the whole way, because the past service of these teachers in these centres does not now rank for pension purposes under the Ministry.
I notice there is a suggestion that the Government have decided to bring in legislation for working certificates. All I want to say about them is that I sincerely hope the Government have not made up their mind on that point, but will allow that, at least, to be an open question. In the first instance, there is no maintenance at all in working certificates. It is merely a statistical record. I have been connected with committees which are considering this problem, and we have come to the conclusion that there is nothing of really great value in working certificates, and that it will be very difficult to work them in this country. We feel strongly that there is no insuperable difficulty in making even attendance
at school count for insurance purposes under the Insurance Act. That is, that the unemployment insurance scheme should be an aid to keeping children in school at least until they can find some stable and permanent employment. I hope the Minister will look at these points in a broad, general way, and get on quickly with the matter, and that he will see, at least, that something is done for these children between 14 and 16 of whom no one seems to have the care. The Government have a great responsibility for not having done something much earlier, and I hope we shall hear something very definite about what the Government are going to do in this very important matter.

Mr. JOHNSTON: The subject we are discussing this afternoon, the appalling tragedy of a million of our fellow-citizens almost perpetually unemployed, is not, I think, treated as it ought to be treated by this House, and I frankly confess that I think all parties are to blame. We are prepared to discuss at length all sorts of subjects and issues in this House which have far less relation to the lives of a million of our fellow-citizens than the subject we are discussing in a very limited way this afternoon. The Ministry of Labour tends to become a sort of almoner's machine. As the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) has said, it has no contact with other Ministries in the Government, and there is no concerted attempt made to deal adequately and in a large way with the problem we have to face. I am not going to attempt for more than a few minutes to offer observations to this House. I have made them on this subject before, but I do want to take up one point that has been made in a small way by some previous speakers. The hon. Member for Accrington (Mr. Hugh Edwards), in reply to an interruption, said be would give his remedy later on. We waited patiently, and no remedy came.

Mr. COVE: Did you expect it?

Mr. JOHNSTON: I did not, but I think it is the duty of a Member of this House not merely to contribute facile criticisms of the Ministry of Labour, but to offer constructive suggestions as to what can be done easily and quickly to break the
back of this unemployment problem. It is nonsense for the hon. Member to say that Governments have nothing to do with it. Governments have a great deal to do with it. It was Government action that flooded this country with reparation ships, destroyed our shipbuilding industry, and caused unemployment in all our shipbuilding centres for the last few years. It is futile to say that Governments have nothing whatever to do with it, and that this problem must be left to industries outside. What can be done? The hon. Member who spoke last, and who is an authority on child problems in this country, has suggested something that could be done at the child end of the problem. He may be right, but the problem does not end at 18. In the area I represent, practically every boy is sacked when he comes to the age of 18, and there is no further employment for him. It is an exaggeration to say every boy, perhaps, but 95 per cent. of the boys and of the girls, too, in Dundee, get discharged when they reach the age of 18, and there is no further employment for them. Here you are manufacturing a class which will cost millions, and probably hundreds of millions, to deal with before you are finished. Boys left school in 1918 and have never had a job since, except, perhaps, an odd job as a bookie's runner. All political parties in the State are responsible for this wastage of human life and of human spirit which we see all round us in our industrial centres to-day.
I said I would offer a constructive suggestion, and I will do so. It has been discussed all over the country and raised time and time again. I really wish the right hon. Gentleman's Department would interest other Government Departments in this problem and bring forward some constructive suggestion next Session. The facts are that, according to the last Census of 1921, there are 800,000 old men and old women of 65 and over in industry to-day. They ought at that time to be retired and have some rest and comfort in the evening of their days, yet here they are toiling at the pitheads, factories and workshops when you have a million younger men and women at the Employment Exchanges. You have got the children working, you have got the old working, while the able-bodied in between are starving at the Employment Exchanges, drawing a miserably insufficient average of £1 a week dole as unemployment
benefit. If you take these old men and women out of industry—I do not say you would make places for 800,000 young men and women, but you would make room for 600,000—you have broken the back of the unemployment problem. How can you do it? I would be out of order in going into detail, but I would offer the following constructive suggestion. In January these old men and women, or the overwhelming proportion of them, will be drawing 10s. a week pension. Suppose we make provision in the country to offer them another £1 a week, making it 30s., to get out of industry—to retire, if you like, on 30s. a week. Offer them that on condition that they get out, and you will automatically make places for, say, 600,000 or 700,000 younger men and women who at present are drawing from the Insurance Fund, partly contributed by the Government, that same £1 a week for doing nothing. It would cost us, if we took out all the 800,000 and gave them another £1 a week, an additional £40,000,000. But, you have saved on the Insurance Fund something like £30,000,000. At a net additional cost to the State of £10,000,000 this Government, any Government, could break the back of the unemployment problem, and have the work of this country done as it ought to be done by the younger men and women who at present are eating out their hearts, bodies and minds in idleness, and so allow the old men and old women to have a rest at the end of their days. Whenever this Government, or any Government, are prepared to spend an additional £10,000,000 of their money you can do it.
The advantage does not end there. I will not, attempt to make an exhaustive balance sheet, but you must consider the effect it would have on local rates, the saving that local authorities would make on Poor and Health Rates—and the cost of public health is growing enormously. It would increase the purchasing power of the working classes, and would automatically give employment to other producers in all sorts of other industries. When we are prepared to visualise this thing in a big way, then this House, by accepting its responsibilities, can break the back of the unemployment problem. The problem is terrible in certain areas. Many of the heavy industries will never recover. What is the use of hon. Members talking about a trade revival, about
our heavy industries recovering and enjoying a boom in trade, if those industries are to be paralysed by local rates of 18S., 19s., and 20s. and over in the £? It is in these areas where unemployment is the greatest, and where you are making it practically impossible for these industries ever to recover.
The hon. Member for Perth said that one way out was through land settlement in this country. The hon. Member who spoke opposite a moment ago was in favour of mobilising an army of unemployed at a fixed rate of wages and sending them like Grenadier Guards to work in the wilds of Canada. Why not organise your labour for productive purposes in this country? Why send Scotsmen to Canada to grow timber when you can grow it at home? Why do it? The hon. Member for Perth never even referred to the problem of afforestation, which is closely allied to the problem of small holdings. The Government will not do anything. They will not even allow a discussion on afforestation in this House, and there is no Minister on the bench opposite responsible for the Forestry Commission. You cannot discuss the question. The whole problem of unemployment is never faced in this House. We are prepared to face anything and everything but the steady deterioration and the premature death of over a million of our fellow citizens. As I have already said, I frankly admit that all parties are equally responsible for the present state of affairs. If the Minister of Labour and the Government would give us a lead and tell us that in the next Session of Parliament they were prepared on their part to see to it that a large proportion of the time of the House was spent in facing up to this problem of unemployment, they would do a service to the country which they will never do by continuing in the fashion they are doing now. If the right hon. Gentleman will, when he comes to reply to-night, give us an assurance that the past with its waste of £50,000,000 a year, with no return, has gone, and that for the future he and his Government are prepared to see that the nation's resources are spent in finding economically useful employment for the people of this country he will have deserved well of his day and generation.

Mr. BALFOUR: I had no intention of intervening in this Debate to-night, but
I desire to say a word or two after having listened to the speech of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston). If I understood him aright, he submitted to the House a constructive proposal for the solution of the unemployment problem, and I gather that his proposal was to pension off a large number of aged people from industry in order to make room for the employment of younger people coming into industry. Does the hon. Gentleman seriously suggest that that would cure the unemployment problem as such in this country? I am quite sure the hon. Gentleman has submitted his proposal in the belief that it would contribute largely to the solution of unemployment, but I would suggest that if he would analyse the situation with care and follow it through to its logical conclusion, he would find that it would only add to our difficulties, and in no material degree contribute to their solution. There is no solution of this problem upon the lines which I have so often heard discussed in this House. The hon. Gentleman said that our present state of unemployment was due to the lethargy of successive Governments.

Mr. JOHNSTON: The hon. Gentleman said that the proposal I made would add to unemployment and make things worse. Would he mind explaining why? It is too serious to make a party point of it.

Mr. BALFOUR: I think the hon. Gentleman misapprehended me. I indicated that it might add to our difficulties. I said that it was no solution of the problem, but that it might add to it at the finish. I put it no higher than that. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why?"] I will pursue the question at length if hon. Members desire me to do so. We have men of 60 and 65 years of age and upwards well fitted to discharge certain duties and functions in any industry. The proposal is to replace in many cases men who are very necessary to certain industries by removing them from the top and bringing in unskilled, inexperienced persons at the bottom. I only throw that out as one indication of what is passing through my mind. I do not think it would be any solution to the great problem. I will leave it at that.
The hon. Gentleman said that our difficulties were largely due to the lethargy
of successive Governments. On the contrary, I think our difficulties are, in the main, due to too great activities on the part of successive Governments since the War. I remember speaking in this House some five or six years ago—I think Dr. Macnamara was then Minister of Labour—when the same problem was under discussion, and when we had not the experience of the continued unemployment we have to-day. If hon. Members are interested to turn up the pages of the OFFICIAL EPORT, they will find that I indicated that the measures which were being proposed for the amelioration of unemployment would probably produce an increase of unemployment. There is no artificial means of settling this matter. The only manner in which you are going to settle it is to leave industry free to go about its business unrestrained and unrestricted, except by a general Statute applicable to the public and the country as a whole, and not in any way applicable to particular industries.
The hon. Member for Dundee said that in Dundee, which is a city I know very well, the boys go into the jute mills and stay until 18 years of age, when 95 per cent. of them are thrown out on to the streets. Why? Because of the interference of the Government in Regulations regarding the wage-rate change applicable, particularly, at a given age. Some boys at The age of 18 under the old system would be earning a wage equal to that earned by men at the age of 30 or 32, and other boys not able to earn that wage were kept in that employment at a wage which enabled them to make a suitable and proper contribution to the maintenance of homes where they were living in families. To-day we say "No." You pass the border line at the age of 18, which is merely an accident. Hon. Gentlemen know that what I say as a matter of human nature is perfectly true, that there are many youths who are regarded as units in industry who are not worth the wages they are being paid at 18.
These are the considerations we should bear in mind in endeavouring to find a solution of this problem. I submit, with a certain amount of hesitation, a statement to the effect that there will be no solution of this problem in this country
as long as our trade and industry are continually hampered by a series of Regulations that people must move according to Government decree, and be paid certain wages for a particular job. I profoundly believe that if you could sweep away all these Regulations we should have developed in this country a state of society applicable to industry where the people in the shops would be strong enough in themselves to compel proper regard to all their rights and just claims. I profoundly believe that in sweeping away all artificial restrictions you would have a higher average wage rate, and a greater number of people in employment.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I rise to take up this discussion from a slightly different point of view from that of preceding speakers. I would, however, like to say this with regard to the speech of the hon. Member for Hampstead (Mr. Balfour), who rose to reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston). My hon. Friend asked him why he did not think his suggestion would contribute to the solution of the unemployed problem, and, with all due respect to the hon. Gentleman, he has not attempted to explain why. He has simply made an assertion and inferred that we should take that assertion as being correct, although he did not offer a, vestige of proof.

Mr. BALFOUR: I did not put it a bit higher than that it was an opinion which I ventured to offer to the House.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The hon. Gentleman made no attempt to prove his assertion, or to say that the figures presented by my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee were wrong. He said that the thing was bad. I could have understood the hon. Gentleman's point of view if he had given any kind of alternative suggestion. Can he give any alternative at all? The only alternative he suggested was in effect this: Just allow the employers to go on their own sweet way, abolish all Government restrictions, go right back a century, give absolute freedom to the employer to exploit workmen. That is his solution of the unemployment problem: longer hours, if you need them, less wages——

Mr. BALFOUR: The hon. Member must not put words into my mouth. I did not say anything remotely like that.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I know the hon. Member did not say that in actual words. He said, withdraw all Government interference, abolish trade boards. What does that mean? It means a wage to be paid which the employer cares to dictate to the workers. I do not think that anyone in the hon. Member's party would accept that. The party that would accept the hon. Member's political philosophy would be dead and doomed. Only Hampstead would stand for ideas of that sort, and even if the people of Hampstead attended the hon. Member's meetings they would not stand for such ideas. The hon. Member for Dundee said that we ought to try, if possible, counter-suggestions. He suggested having the old people in a special old-age pension scheme. Even if that idea were accepted to-morrow, and we started to work such a scheme, we should still have the unemployed to deal with. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that we should concern ourselves to-day with the question how the unemployed are treated.
It is a commonplace among all parties to say that our main concern is not the treatment of the unemployed, but the solution of the unemployment problem, hut in the attempt to work out a solution of the problem it is of vital concern that the treatment of the unemployed should be kept in mind. I have gone into the figures regarding the wages of working people, taken from a report regarding Scotland, and I think the figures may be taken as fairly typical for England. In 1922, when the present Prime Minister was Prime Minister, the working people in Scotland lost over £4,000,000 in wages. In 1923, they lost £317,000; in 1924, the year of the Labour Government, they gained £550,000 in wages—that was in Scotland alone; In 1925 they lost in wages £78,000; and in 1926 they gained £49,000. With the exception of 1926, the working people lost steadily in wages in every year in which Conservative Governments have hem in power. The only year in which they gained substantially in wages was the year when the Labour Government held office. In Scotland alone, the working
people gained over £500,000 in 1924, when the Labour Government were in office, and in every other year, with the exception of 1926, the wages have been depressed. The policy of a Government which depresses wages, which takes the side of the employers to depress wages and to lengthen the hours of the work-people, contributes more to unemployment than any other action of which I am aware.
We are constantly hearing figures which seek to prove that unemployment is diminishing. I cannot accept in full that statement. The right hon. Gentleman may say that statistics prove a lessening in the figures, but what do I find from the Report of the Scottish Board of Health in regard to the Poor Law? In 1926, when the present Government's restriction regarding the unemployed came into operation, the Scottish Board of Health issued to parish councils a letter reducing the amount of Poor Law relief paid to unemployed persons. For instance, a man and woman with two of a family got an amount up to 31s. 6d. Although 5s. was taken from them, and although the parish councils reduced the amounts generally paid to the unemployed in poor relief, the curious thing is that at the end of the year there was no decrease in the gross expenditure in maintaining the unemployed. The new regulation meant that persons were taken from the Employment Exchange roll and thrown on to Poor Law relief.
Figures have been given to-day which show that in shipbuilding there are 22 per cent. unemployed. Hon. Members opposite may say, "Get your industry efficient; make the workpeople efficient, and their efficiency will contribute to the solving of the problem of unemployment." I cannot accept that point of view. I have heard mining Members and Conservative Members argue that if we make mining more efficient, we shall contribute to a solution of the unemployment problem. I cannot accept that view as being correct. Shipbuilding is fairly efficiently run. Go to any shipbuilding yard on the Clyde, and you will find that the industry was never more efficiently organised than it is to-day. Go to Harland and Wolff's, and you will find that it is a marvel of organisation. To-day, the capacity of the worker to produce
is growing by leaps and bounds, but alongside of that, the capacity of the working classes to consume is not increasing to anything like the same extent. No matter how we talk about making industry efficient, no matter how much we talk about reorganisation, unless alongside the reorganisation of industry we can at the same time increase the capacity of the working classes to consume that which they produce through reorganisation, it will have no effect in altering the condition of the unemployed people.
It is of the utmost importance that the unemployed should be well treated. Whenever we ask for particulars regarding the unemployed, the Minister says, "This was done by the Labour Government," or he says, "This has been done by succeeding Governments." Because it has been done by other Governments, we are expected to agree to it. I am not going to argue whether this or that has been done by a Labour Government. The Minister of Labour is responsible to-day for dealing with the unemployment problem, and it is no excuse to say that something was done by a preceding Minister of Labour. It is his duty to-day to justify himself in what his Department is doing, and not to excuse, himself because some Government in the past have done certain things. Is the thing which the Ministry of Labour are now doing the right and proper thing to be done? Take the regulation with regard to not genuinely seeking work. I shall be told that that regulation has been operated by other Governments; but that does not make it right. If hon. Members will go to any Employment Exchange and see how the regulation with regard to not genuinely seeking work operates, they will see whether or not it eliminates the genuine from the ungenuine person.
I know something about unemployment administration. You go to a committee, and when a person comes before you, you say, "Are you genuinely seeking work?" If he is well up in the way of reply, if he is "fly," he can turn to his pockets and produce a list of places where he claims to have been genuinely seeking work. No one can deny it. Then along comes the simple fellow, the honest chap, the boiler-maker, and he is asked whether he has been genuinely seeking work. He replies, "What is the
use of going to John Brown's? They have more men there than they need. What is the use of going to Harland and Wolf 's? They paid off men on Saturday. What is the use of going to So-and-so? They have dismissed me." Because he has not invented a list of places that he has never visited, because he has told the truth, the Committee say to him, "You are not genuinely seeking work; you cannot have benefit." This Regulation hits the honest person, while the man who is "fly" can get under the Regulation. The only thing that this Regulation, in regard to not genuinely seeking work, does is to penalise the honest person.
Take the Regulation dealing with single men. Could there be a more unjust Regulation than that which refuses benefit to a single man living with his parents? I remember a case in my Division of two young men who went before the local committee. One was refused benefit because his father was working; because he was in steady, regular work. The other young fellow was granted benefit because his father was in prison and could not keep him. It used to be a theory in this country, more or less accepted, that if the parents of a child were bad, the badness was visited on the child. Nowadays, that principle is reversed by the Minister of Labour, and the better the parents are the worse the son is treated; the worse the parents are, the better the son is treated.
The Minister of Labour may produce his figures, and we may be put off with the Blanesburgh Report. We may have a Debate on unemployment in November, when the Minister will tell us that he has a unanimous report signed by Labour Members. We have been told by the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland that his reason for cutting down Poor Law is because the Labour people signed a report, stating what the maximum of Poor Law relief should be. The Minister of Labour is following false hopes if he thinks the working people of this country are going to accept the Blanesburgh Report. They are not going to do that. It is sheer impertinence for members of the Blanesburgh Committee, who cannot live on £400 a year and must get their incomes supplemented in some way, telling other people, who are quite as good as
they are, that they can live on 18s. a week, in some cases on less.
It is the duty of the Minister of Labour to see that every person who is unemployed has a chance of finding work. The Employment Exchanges were not erected for the purpose of giving insurance benefit. They were supposed to be a link between the person looking for work and the employer looking for workmen. If a man or woman signs on at the Employment Exchange, and is willing to work, and the Employment Exchange is not able to find a job for them then they have a right to the benefit until they can get work. There is no other test. Any other test only penalises the honest man and produces the liar. The Minister of Labour ought to reverse the Regulations. Each year they go on they become harsher and more cruel. I had hoped that we should have been told one or two things about juvenile unemployment. The juvenile training centres are being cut down for no real reason. We shall, of course, be told nothing fresh to-day, but I want to warn the Minister of Labour that he need not get the foolish notion into his head that the Blanes-burgh Committee's Report is going to get an easy passage in this House. We shall offer the most unrelenting opposition and give it no quarter at all.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I must confess that I have some difficulty in following the hon. Member for the Gorbals Division of Glasgow (Mr. Buchanan) in his remarks with regard to the Employment Exchanges and those men who are genuinely seeking work. My experience in the City of Dundee is different from that of the hon. Member in the City of Glasgow. Many working people who apply at the Employment Exchanges for work find it somewhat difficult to obtain the necessary evidence from the employer, or the representatives of the employers, in order to support their case and prove that they are genuinely seeking work. Many of them, of course, apply to the foreman or someone in that capacity and are pushed off, they are too busy to see about the matter, and the difficulty which many of these people experience is that of obtaining the necessary evidence. I do not think the people at the Employment Exchange are taken in as the hon. Member suggests. At any rate the work at the Employment Exchange in Glasgow
seems to be carried out somewhat differently to that of the Employment Exchange in Dundee.

Mr. BUCHANAN: They are all taken in.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I am very careful——

Mr. BUCHANAN: You have been done in the Lobby before now.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I can generally manage to hold my own with those who differ from me. From my experience of the Dundee Employment Exchange officials I do not think they are easily taken in by these "fly" men of which the hon. Member has spoken. We have "fly" men in Dundee, but when they read a list of people on whom they say they have called they do not find the officials of the Employment Exchange in Dundee so satisfied with that explanation that the money is paid out. They are very careful in checking such information and finding out whether the statements made are correct. There is no doubt that some manage to get round the officials in some way or other, but I cannot confirm the general statement which the hon. Member has made. The question of unemployment, however, is much bigger than that. Very grave and great questions are involved in this problem. There is the tariff question, which appeals to hon. Members opposite. There is the free trade aspect of the question, which appeals to hon. Members of the Liberal party, and to some extent to hon. Members of the Labour party. Whatever may be said on these two points there is no doubt that the problem of unemployment is very complicated. It is not simply a national question; it is an international question. Only recently an important conference was held on the Continent of representatives of industrial and commercial organisations and of the banking interest, and they came to the decision that the object of all countries should be the removal of all barriers to the exchange of trade between all nations of the world.
The more I consider this question of unemployment the more I find that a larger vision is required than has yet been manifested by the statesmen of this country. It embraces armaments, and tariffs, and questions of trade and finance.
All these questions are involved, and for these reasons it is hardly possible for anyone to declare that a mere national decision would really bring a thorough settlement of the matter. With that view before me I cannot place the entire responsibility for the position on the Ministry of Labour under the present Government, or under any Government, but at the same time it is only reasonable that we should try and deal with the problem from a national standpoint. One argument which has been used against the proposal of my colleague (Mr. Johnston) is that these people who are pensioned off find on retirement that the best thing they can do is to go and get a job, and very often those who have employment to offer say, "Here is a man with a pension. We shall he able to get him at less wage." In this way the pensioner comes up against the interests of the unemployed. There are difficulties connected with this particular subject.
Another proposal which has been made towards getting seine sort of a settlement of the question—it was advocated by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston)—is that we should have a Committee of this House to consider plans and determine upon certain schemes which might be carried out in order to meet the immediate requirements of the great army of the unemployed. I know that any proposal coming from the Opposition will meet with a certain amount of disapproval and disfavour by the Government. They will say that the scheme is not feasible, or proper, and that if they adopted it, it would naturally be a reflection on the Government which had done nothing to meet the situation. Here we have this vast army of unemployed; unequipped and unemployed. The British Army is fed and equipped, getting a wage which is small, I admit, but the principle is there, and whether that Army is employed or not, the very people who are now condemning the present Government, and condemned previous Governments, for paying out what is termed the dole to the body of unemployed people never raise the slightest objection to the Government sustaining and paying for a standing Army which is utterly unemployed, and merely waiting for employment. And dastardly employment it is when it does come. We passed
millions last night for the Army and the Navy. How then can we, as Members of the House of Commons, defend the policy of sustaining an unemployed Army on land and sea, not only in our own country but in China and other parts of the world, and at the same time refuse to do anything for the army of unemployed workmen throughout the country.
8.0 p.m.
We are told that we must get rid of the dole whereby people are getting money for nothing. The audacity of a policy of that kind lies in this fact, that if the country had not found what is called the dole years ago you would have had a revolution in this country without any Communist party at all. You could not have dared to tell the people years ago that there was nothing for them. A country that is wealthy even now, even in its present industrial depression, has the audacity through a Government Department to tell men and women, "You have had all you can get, so many weeks' pay, now you have to find anything you can. You can go to the guardians or to the parish council." That is a state of affairs you cannot defend. At the same time it is our duty to say to the people that they have a considerable responsibility to themselves in this matter. They must ask themselves, "How do we spend the money we have got?" The work-a-day people of this country, the vast majority of the working people, are spending their money in a way, through a channel, which is non-productive. It is being spent upon a trade which, although it may give employment in various directions and at the same time pays some contribution to those who are employed, is not a productive trade. I know that I should not be in order if I were to discuss matters requiring legislation, but I think I am in order in suggesting certain lines of adjustment. If half the money which is spent at present on that outstanding trade—the brewery business, which is paying huge dividends when our legitimate industries are lying in the dust—had been put through the proper channels of industry, employment would have been found for 800,000 people. I know that there is no real question about this. This is the view of those who have gone into the matter. This is the view of Sir George Paish, the well-known
economist, and I will not allow anyone to challenge that particular statement.

Mr. J. JONES: I will, for one.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: That does not affect the question. Sir George Paish is a big man. He is the man at the head, with a capacity for dealing with business matters, and he makes that declaration. I am not able to go to the length that he does, but I say that he makes that statement and he is able to defend it. He would be prepared to meet any hon. Members of this House and defend that statement. He says that if one had the power to direct money which is now passing into that one particular channel, into the legitimate channels of industry, employment would be found for that body of men who are now standing idle. At the very lowest estimate the proportion of those who would be found employment would be no fewer than four to one. Four persons would be employed as against one at present employed in that particular trade. I am speaking of it as a trade, and I am dealing purely and simply with the question of the unemployed and with the economic question. Whether we agree with what has transpired under the changed law of the United States of America does not affect this question, but the very companies which were formerly engaged in America in that trade which has now become illegal have found that, by the production of legitimate commodities instead of that other particular produce, they can find work for no fewer than four and, according to the particular line of business, 10, 15, or 20 men, where formerly only one man was employed. By every party in this House, but especially by the Labour party, that question must of necessity be faced. I know the difficulties of the Labour party in dealing with it. It is not the financial aspect but the consuming aspect which is the difficulty. We hear a great deal about raising the purchasing power of the workers, but if the workers spend their money in that given direction they are deliberately cheating their fellow-men out of the work that would otherwise be available for them.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member must remember that the Minister cannot reply upon these points. The brewery trade does not come under the Minister of Labour, and the hon. Gentleman must deal with the subjects for
which the Minister who is in charge of the Vote is responsible.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Of course, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, I bow to your ruling at once, but in view of the statements by previous speakers, and by my colleague for Dundee, who practically absolved the Minister of Labour from any special responsibility on this question—and we are putting forward certain proposals with which my colleague knew perfectly well the Ministry of Labour could not possibly deal—I had hoped that I might have been able to deal with this point, but I recognise that in these particular instances which I am putting forward there are exceptional difficulties. There are not many who would care to touch upon this question, but, the same point having been raised by previous speakers, although on somewhat different lines, I took it that I was in order in raising the matter, but, as you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, have given your ruling, I will leave that aspect of the question.
Dealing with the general question, there is undoubtedly a tremendous need of getting to grips with this question in a way that has never yet been done. There are those who would, and do, study certain phases of this question, and from their political platforms they will deal with and confine themselves to certain particular aspects. The problem has various aspects. I have pointed out several, international and national. If we set aside our prejudices we could deal with the matter. I know the Government have their particular difficulty in handling certain phases of the unemployed question. I am convinced that every party in this House has its own special difficulties, but this question has got to be faced, and I am afraid that many have not yet had the courage to face it and deal with it as they should do. The workers are in sore need of employment, and all of us ought to be deeply concerned in regard to the present position. It calls for very deep and close consideration. It is not simply a party responsibility, but it is an individual responsibility. We ask for and we keep Empire Day. We say, "Buy British goods." Then how does it come about that I am not in order in saying, "Buy British goods" instead of buy something else that will not be British goods? It is
a very remarkable point. I quite agree I am out of order from the standpoint of the Rules of the House and the ruling of the Chair.
We have had representations from various parts of the country showing that this unemployment question is never faced in the way it should be faced. We have pointed out difficulties, and I have been the means of manifesting to the Chair the practical difficulties of getting down to the question. We have tried to deal with the difficulties in various ways. We have tried to deal with them on the ordinary plane, which is generally the basis upon which the thing is faced, but it is an outrage upon the country at large, and especially upon the people who are under those great disadvantages that they have to go to those Exchanges—honest and genuine people—in order to try to find work. The young people are drifting into courses which are entirely unsatisfactory, and which are detrimental to the best interests of the country at large. These people are in the difficulty which, it has been pointed out, exists in the city of Dundee. They are drafted out of work by an arrangement that at a certain age they must leave. But I am glad to say that locally conferences of employers and employed with public representatives are coming together on the subject. There ought to be a conference between the Government and the parties represented in this House. Some conferences of these parties have been held already in private in the Committee Rooms of the House of Commons and elsewhere. They have dealt with certain phases of this question, but there is an unwillingness and a want of courage to get down to many of the reasons lying behind the present state of affairs. There are not only direct reasons, but also indirect reasons which, in other circumstances, would have been stated in this House. That is the case which I submit this evening.

Mr. JOHN: You, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, have already pointed out that we are not in a position to argue upon lines which will involve legislative measures. I want to criticise the work of the Minister in respect of his own Department. I shall not attempt to deal with the controversial matter which has been introduced by the hon. Member who has just spoken, but it surely follows
that, if the hon. Member can argue that the spending capacity of the working classes, or the amount of money spent by the working classes, has got a bearing upon the unemployed and upon the unemployment question, then it can be argued much more keenly that the policy of the Government with regard to necessitous areas has a much more tremendous bearing upon the unemployment question. If the Government had not been so very keen in pressing forward their policy of depressing the wages of the working classes in the last two or three years, the unemployment problem would not have been so acute. The Parliamentary Secretary, in his statement, attempted to justify the attitude of the Government by stating that the unemployed had not increased to any appreciable extent during recent months. That may be true, if we take the number of unemployed over the whole country: but to take the number of the unemployed over the whole country is not a fair basis to go upon, because the tendency during the past 12 months has been for the unemployed to be placed more upon a territorial basis than upon a basis for the whole of the country. It is quite true that the heavy industries are hit, and it is also true that the number of those employed in other industries has increased, but in a number of industries it must be admitted that the number of those unemployed has also increased to an appreciable extent.
Therefore, if we take the areas in which are situated the heavy industries, we shall find that the number of unemployed in those areas has increased very materially. The case of the mining industry is a case in point, and I should like to know whether the Minister intends to do something to meet the abnormal difficulties of those areas. If we take the mining areas, the unemployed problem is getting more acute, day after day, and week after week, and to go on assuming that this problem can be dealt with simply upon the lines of the Insurance Act is, I am afraid, adopting an attitude which is doomed to disappointment. The hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) mentioned certain difficulties with respect to certain areas in relationship to the administration of the Regulations. In the areas where the heavy industries are situated, the operation of those Regulations is hitting people much harder than in other areas.
Take, for instance, the Regulation in regard to "not genuinely seeking work." The Parliamentary Secretary, on 27th June, in reply to the hon. Member for Bedwellty (Mr. C. Edwards), said that he was not aware of the increase in the number of men applicants who were being struck off on the ground that they were "not genuinely seeking work," and that to a great extent this was being left to the decision and the discretion of The Rota Committees. If that was so, we have not much ground for complaint. There are on the Rota Committees men representing the workmen and the employers, men who know the local conditions and are conversant with everything that applies to a case. Those Rota Committees come to a decision and then divisional office in Cardiff—I am taking the South Wales area as an example—people who know nothing at all about the conditions or the cases, have the effrontery to turn down those cases.

It being a quarter past Eight of the Clock, and there being Private Business set down by direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means under Standing Order No, 8, further Proceeding was postponed without Question put.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

COUNTY OF LONDON ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY BILL.

Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.

EAST ANGLIAN ELECTRICITY BILL.

Order read for consideration of Lords Amendments.

Motion made, and Question, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered," put, and agreed to.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

Lords Amendments considered accordingly, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 30.—(For protection of County of London Electric Supply Company, Limited.)

Mr. ERNEST ALEXANDER: I beg to move, as a consequential Amendment to the Lords Amendment, in Sub-section (1, a), after the word "of," to insert the words "the last preceding Section of."
It was thought that this new Clause, inserted in another place, rather cut across the ordinary law with regard to the supply of electricity in this country. On behalf of the Essex County Council and in conference with the promoters of the Bill it has now been agreed to insert this Amendment if it will satisfy all parties.

Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: On a point of Order. I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton East (Mr. E. Alexander) has made a slight mistake regarding the arrangement that was come to. The wording that was to be altered was in Sub-section (1, a), to leave out the word "of," and to insert instead thereof the words "conferred by." I think my hon. Friend will see that he has made a mistake.

Mr. W. THORNE: If a decision has been arrived at by the House, is an hon. Member entitled to raise new points regarding it?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall) is too late. I understand that the words inserted in the Clause have been agreed to by all parties this afternoon.

Sir F. HALL: With all deference, that was why I was raising the question, because the words I have suggested are the words which were agreed to by all parties, and I think that my hon. Friend moved his Amendment in the way he did in error.

SUPPLY.

CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1927.

Postponed Proceeding resumed on Amendment proposed on consideration of First Resolution.

Which Amendment was to leave out "£7,303,564," and to insert instead thereof "£7,303,464."—[Mr. T. Shaw.]

Question again proposed, "That £7,303,564' stand part of the Resolution."

Mr. JOHN: When my speech was interrupted I was referring to the superseding by the Divisional Office at Cardiff
of the decisions of the Rota Committees. It is very difficult to understand why a Divisional Office turns down these cases on the ground that they are "not genuinely seeking work." What are the local conditions in the mining area? The Rhondda Valley is typical of other mining valleys. There is no other industry but mining in the locality, and every mine has its own unemployment. Practically every man is working intermittently. These men go before the Rota Committees and present their lists. They have been to practically every colliery in the neighbourhood. The Rota Committee will ask a man to walk 15, 18 or 20 miles. That he does and he comes back and presents his list to the Committee as evidence. Then the Divisional Office in Cardiff turns down the decision of the Rota Committee. In the last six months, in the two Exchanges in my own constituency, 410 cases have been turned down in that way. If the Ministry appoint persons on the Rota Committees they ought to have sufficient confidence in those persons to accept their decisions.
There is the other point with regard to the turning down of cases on the ground that the men concerned have not been, during the last two years, in insurable employment. The depression in the mining industry has now been going on for more than two years, and there is no other work available for these men. They may tramp up the valleys and across the mountains to look for work without getting it, and, because they are unable to get work, they are penalised under this regulation. I would call the attention of the Minister to another complaint. That is regarding the treatment of the unemployed in some of the Employment Exchanges. As a result of the irregular working of the mines there are occasions when men have to sign and usually they are at work on the day appointed for the signing. A case occurred recently at the Treorchy Exchange where miners who were coming home from work at three o'clock in the afternoon went in to sign. No special provision had been made for them, with the result that they had to wait about the pavement in their pit clothes, some of them wet, until seven or eight o'clock that night. In fact, that Exchange is a very unsuitable building for the ordinary work, quite apart from
extraordinary occasions of that kind. The lavatory conditions are disgusting. There are no facilities for the clerks to do their work; there are no private rooms, and even what is called the manager's room is simply a screened-off portion of a general apartment. The attention of the authorities of the Exchange ought to be called to the fact that when it is necessary to sign on a a number of men who have just completed a day's work, facilities should be given to them to do so.
The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that in the mining areas a large number of these men could not be absorbed. What provision is being made for them? The only provision mentioned is that of training centres or camps to fit men for the Dominions or for agricultural work at home. That, however, only involves about 700 men, and how far will that go towards the solution of a problem which concerns 1,000,000 people? It is also argued that to prevent men who are not miners engaging in the industry will have an effect but that is not going to touch the fringe of the question. The attention of the Ministry ought to be devoted to the unusual unemployment which exists at present and which shows all the possibilities of continuing in the areas of the heavy industries. The policy of the Government in regard to the relations between national and local administration is making the problem more acute. The local authorities cannot cope with the unemployment, and yet the policy of the Ministry in striking hundreds of men off the unemployment insurance benefit list means that the local guardians have to bear the responsibility for those men. To that extent the problem is being made more acute because the mining industry is suffering from the burden of higher rates. If the local authorities have to bear the burden of unemployment, it increases the rates and, as the rates are increased, the collieries are incapable of working regularly and irregularity of work further increases the cost of production. The rates in the South Wales area, it is safe to say, represents somewhere about 2s. per ton, which means that for every day lost, in addition to the ordinary colliery loss there is a loss of another 1s. per ton. These are some of the problems which we have to face in the mining industry, and I would ask the
Minister to consider them, especially the two points which I have raised as to interference by the divisional office and the question of the Exchange at Treorchy.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: I do not propose to repeat the facts in connection with the Employment Exchanges which have been given by the hon. Member for West Rhondda (Mr. John). In my Division we suffer in the way he has described and all our collieries are affected. I understand that this is a general discussion which includes Class 5, Vote 2, along with other Votes, and 1 wish to raise one point in connection with that Vote. I am glad to find that an increased amount is to be handed over to the Special Grants Committee. Our chief complaint in Glamorgan, with regard to the distribution of these grants, is that in the mining districts we cannot embark on any capital works other than the construction of new arterial roads or the improvement of existing roads. Since the beginning of last year, for some reason or other the Unemployment Grants Committee have set their faces against making any contributions at all with regard to roads of this class, and I ask the Minister to have some inquiry made into the matter in order to see if we cannot be restored to the position which we occupied when the Unemployment Grants Committee began to distribute this money. In areas with large unemployment it is a very important matter.
I take the case of one village alone with which probably the Minister is acquainted, because I think he has had some trouble there. In Mardy village there has been a complete cessation of work in the collieries on two or three occasions, and since last Saturday practically all the working men of that village have been without any employment at all, apart from a few who are being retained in order to keep the collieries in a position to restart and free from water and other dangers. Some 2,000 men in that village will be coming on the unemployment relief list, and I have gone to the trouble of taking out some figures in connection with that case. Even when there was partial employment in that village we were paying out, in addition to unemployment insurance benefit, about £800 in parish relief, and we have been doing so for the last eight or nine
months. We have a scheme there which has been certified and approved and the money is at the Treasury which ought to have been granted to us by the Unemployment Grants Committee—somewhere about £50,000 or £60,000. This money could have been usefully employed, and these men, instead of breaking their hearts and doing nothing at street corners, could have been put to do the work on the new road that I am describing.
I do not know what the Minister will be able to tell us with respect to recruitment. I want to emphasise the fact that we have in the Rhondda Valleys in the two divisions anything in the region of between 10,000 and 12,000 men who never again, even under the most prosperous conditions, can be absorbed in the industry. For the last two years no new workmen have been coming into the Rhondda Valleys at all, and we recognise that, in respect of the young men whom we have—and we have a very large number who have left school for some years, and have never had a day's employment—unless we proceed very quickly to find something useful in the shape of work for these young men to do, they will fast become unemployable. For these reasons, I urge upon the Minister to put before us some scheme in which we can co-operate with him in respect to recruiting the young men in that district, so that they may find employment elsewhere, thus, as my hon. Friend the Member for West Rhondda said, relieving the burden on the rates, which at the present time is very heavy indeed.

Mr. MacLAREN: Complaints have been made that men who have to traverse the country looking for employment may, in the course of those Peregrinations, go considerable distances from their homes, and it is reported that they may have to find shelter in the casual wards of some of our workhouses. When they go to these casual wards, they must remain there for two days, in which case they would not be able to apply for a job which they might possibly get if they were able to do so the day after entering the wards. If that is really the case, as has been reported, cannot something be done to remedy it? This case was given to me by a number of men who had come from the north of England looking for a job in Piccadilly the other
day. They could not receive the shelter of the workhouse, because it meant taking two days, and, therefore, they had to stay out of doors all night in order to apply for a job in Piccadilly.
There is another question upon which I should like some enlightenment from the Minister. I have been taking considerable interest in the activities of the Employment Exchange in my own area, and I want to know who it is in the right hon. Gentleman's Department who looks after unemployment. To whom can I appeal on matters such as finding new avenues for employment? Has the right hon. Gentleman an official in his Department who looks after unemployment?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): There are the Exchange managers.

Mr. MacLAREN: I was not meaning that. The Exchange Managers, when they are in difficulties about finding new avenues of employment for the men in their area, have no one, so far as I know, to whom they can go for advice—no one who is a permanent official at the Ministry, a man specifically dealing with the questions of unemployment and employment. The whole of the Department, it would seem—and I do not wonder at it—is entirely devoted to the question of allocating out-of-work money, or running after the careers of those who are appealing for money, or looking up the past of everybody, in that enormous building down at Kew. In a word, the whole of the organisation, it seems, is devoted to palliatives, rather than to doing anything to solve the problem of unemployment. There is another thing, which I know would involve the bringing in of a Bill. In my own area, we have men coming before the rota committee—and I have had some experiences on the rota committee—whom we know are very, shall I say, respectable. We know that they are not the usual gentlemen who know all the arts and subtleties and manoeuvres by which it is possible to get round a rota committee, but we have to ask these men, "Have you been genuinely looking for a job? "They say, "Yes," but then they have to conform to the Regulations by showing us a list of the firms to whom they have applied, and it is very pathetic to see these men trudging round the town when we know at the Exchange beforehand that it is hopeless for them to go.
It is all very well for us to sit here comfortably and talk about these things, but one sees these poor chaps coming before the rota committee, with their boots nearly off their feet, and before they go out again, we could tell them that it is hopeless for them to go to these various firms for work. But they have to do it, because of the Regulations of the Ministry. We have been trying, in Burslem more particularly, to get the employers to send their notifications of vacancies to the Employment Exchange, and I do not think I am overstating the case when I say, from my own personal experience, that the manager of the Burslem Employment Exchange can tell to a nicety, every month, the number of jobs in the area. He can tell every day-after 11 o'clock in the morning if there is likely to be a job for any man on the list among all the large firms in the town, for the employers who do not record their vacancies with him are insignificant in number. We know the vacancies which are likely to be open, and yet we have to keep these poor fellows trudging along, and knocking at doors at which we know there is no chance of employment.
Could something not be done, if not nationally, then by giving some area power to experiment on this question? Could we not get the employers to notify all the vacancies to the Employment Exchange, and could we not have such an equipment at the Exchange, with the manager and his assistants, as to obviate the necessity for these people going about on this fruitless quest, and thus do away altogether with this ridiculous question, "Are you genuinely seeking work?" Not infrequently, it has been my experience on the rota committee that the man who is most enthusiastic in producing a list of the employers from whom he has been seeking work is usually the man who has never been to anybody at all; and the honest man, who for some reason or other has not been able to get around for the last two or three days, owing perhaps to illness, is usually the man who has to suffer most because of his very honesty. I do not know if the Minister will consider that point. I am very keen about it. If he cannot do anything nationally, can he try this experiment in one district, giving the manager of the Employment Exchange there full power to secure notification of all the vacancies in his area,
so that he would know whether it was of any use to send men here and there seeking jobs?
While listening to the Debate this afternoon, I have heard many questions raised in connection with the main problem of unemployment. It would be unkind to take advantage of a Conservative Minister of Labour being in his place to lecture him upon what he should do and should not do. If Conservatism means anything at all it means the maintenance of a system to which those of us who criticise him are diametrically opposed; and therefore I think it would be futile to ask the Minister of Labour to go into the country with the Minister of Agriculture in order to open up the land in the manner suggested by the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton). The Conservative party is based upon an historic development going back to the time when the land was ruthlessly torn from the people and when unemployment was generated. When land is free and men can secure a piece for themselves, not only is a man's share of the wealth produced very high but the difficulty is to get combined labour at any price. The words I am now using are the words of no less a person than Karl Marx, if he may be quoted to a Conservative Minister. Robinson Crusoe was not unemployed, nor was his man Friday, though if a Conservative landowner had come along and "collared" the land he could have kept both of them out of a job until they submitted their labour to him and he had exacted the full fruits of their labour for the maintenance of himself. That is the dispensation we have in England, and so why waste time about it? One Member after another rises in the House with schemes. The hon. Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Edwards) is not only very voluble but has a great command of Welsh eloquence, and I thought we were going to hear something useful when he began to say in his vehement way, "The Government must diagnose this disease and come forward with a scientific explanation." But it is late in the day to ask any Government to do that. We know perfectly well that man is a land animal and that he can only live by using the land, and that if land is restricted in its uses those who cannot get it will be unemployed. Why waste time? There is the reason why you have unemployed—acres
of unused land in England, thousands of men looking for jobs, the Employment Exchanges in between, and respectable gentlemen on the rota committees asking these dear men, "Have you been looking for a job?" That is a system of economy such as one might expect to find in a lunatic asylum.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member seems to be developing his speech along the lines of proposing new legislation.

Mr. MACLAREN: I was waiting until you stopped me, Sir, but so far I have not suggested the taxation of land values. I thought I was keeping quite clear of the suggestion of how to open up the land, and, therefore, that I would not come under the restriction of your ruling. However, as I appear to have indicated to the Minister of Labour what I had in mind I will not pursue that, subject. Among all the suggestions heard in the course of the Debate there was one which I thought the Minister might adopt; it follows along a line which has been in my own mind. It was the suggestion that the Minister of Labour might do a great deal in co-operation with the Minister of Agriculture. That suggestion was made by the hon. Member for Perth. I am sure the Ministers can submerge any little jealousies that may exist between them in the effort to produce something for the unemployed.
The hon. and gallant Member for Abingdon (Major Glyn) suggested an extension of the training centres in order to qualify Britishers to go to the Colonies. If the Minister adopts the suggestion of the hon. Member for Perth and peruses the volumes of information to hand from the Ministry of Agriculture he will find many suggestions as to providing work for the unemployed; but I have to be careful, and I will not press the policy which was in my mind. Frankly, I see no use in making suggestions to Ministers of Labour as to what they may do or can do. All I have attempted this afternoon is to put a few questions as to the machinery of the Department and to hope that it may be improved. Before I sit down may I say that it was a ghastly thing to see what I saw the other morning in Piccadilly, 15,000 men crowding into that street to look for work. I spoke to some of those
men afterwards. That state of thins is a ghastly reflection on the state of the country. I know that many hon. Members opposite look upon it as ghastly. We are looking for solutions of the problem. I have a solution as clear as the light which is running through this Chamber this evening, and if I did not know it and understand it I would not be in politics now, but how many people would follow me I do not know, and I must content myself with the reflection of the philosopher who said, "The older I get the more wise men become."

Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMS: I always like to listen to the speeches of the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren).They are always interesting, and they always give rise to a little speculation as to how long it will take him to reach a certain subject. He rather horrified me to-night, because I thought he had abandoned his allegiance to Mr. Henry George and transferred it to Karl Marx, but. I think that was merely a device to enable him to approach his subject without being pulled up. I want to comment on the interesting remark made by the hon. Member for West Rhondda (Mr. John) when he was discussing the problem of juvenile unemployment, always difficult in times of trade depression. He drew attention to the conditions which no doubt, exist in South Wales and the difficulty some of the young people there have in getting a start. I was wondering whether the decision to restrict recruiting in the coal mines may not conceivably aggravate the situation to which he draws attention. On the other hand, the situation is not a had one generally. Taking the country as a whole, the problem of juvenile unemployment is nothing like so serious now as it was three or four years ago. In a Debate on unemployment in which I spoke some months ago I produced figures as to the number of young people who were becoming registered as insured persons at the age of 16—or between the ages of 16 and 18; that being an indication, of course, that they have started work: and as the rate at which those young people were becoming insured was—allowing for those who were still at school—roughly equal to the number of young people attaining those ages it seemed to show, broadly speaking, that we were not only absorbing the whole lot but overtaking some of the arrears.
The importance of that from the point of view of my hon. Friend's speech is this. If in the country as a whole the problem of juvenile employment is considered to be a particularly difficult one—and it is peculiarly difficult in certain areas—evidently what we have to do is to use the Employment Exchange system to see if we can get these young people started at work wherever there are opportunities. I agree that there is nothing more deplorable than to see young people running about with no occupation at all. I want to refer to the practice of crowds of men rushing to places where some much advertised public work is to be started. I had a case of this kind in my own constituency in which a farmer wrote to the daily papers about the difficulty he had experienced in obtaining labour to deal with a sugar-beet crop, and the result of this publicity was that a large number of men turned up in the hope of getting a job. As a matter of fact, when the farmer wrote that letter he had succeeded in getting locally all the help he required, and he had solved his problem. Nevertheless, a large number of men tramped long distances in the hope of obtaining temporary employment. I am sure that is the kind of hardship which we all want to avoid, and, if the Press would help in this direction and avoid giving undue publicity to the places where these new public works are being undertaken, this difficulty might be avoided. If the Press find it necessary to announce these things, they might make it quite clear whether all the necessary labour has been secured locally in order to avoid these men making such heartbreaking journeys.
The workhouse rule also presents a serious difficulty. I know I shall be out of order in discussing Poor Law administration, and all I wish to say is that I have experienced these difficulties locally, because some boards of guardians have been asked to enforce the two nights rule while other boards are not enforcing it. In my constituency, the result has been that we have had to keep an extra staff, because an unusually large number of these people pass from casual ward to casual ward. Of course, I do not regard the Minister of Labour as necessarily being the appropriate
Minister to deal with the problem of finding jobs in the big centres of population. I know it is his duty to make sure that such jobs as may be available are filled by the people who want them, and he is also concerned with alleviating the position of those who are unable to obtain employment. I think it is a mistake to concentrate our Debates in regard to unemployment too much on the salary of the Minister of Labour instead of devoting more attention to the salary of the President of the Board of Trade, who is responsible for doing the things that may lead to less unemployment.
9.0 p.m.
The last speaker referred to the difficulty of interpreting the words "genuinely seeking work.'' We are all aware of that difficulty. We are constantly receiving communications from our constituents on this question, and we know the nature of the problem. The real difficulty seems to me to be that we apply to different areas the same test. The constituency which I represent is fairly lucky, because I do not think we have more than 3 per cent. of our insured workpeople unemployed. In the constituency in Staffordshire where I was a candidate in 1923, they had nearly ten times that amount of unemployment. You might apply the test to which I have referred in my constituency in an intelligible way, but where you have one-third of the people out of employment it ceases to have the same effect, because you know the great bulk of those people cannot obtain employment under any circumstances whatsoever. One is constantly meeting people who speak of the difficulty they have in getting men to do odd jobs, and, although that is no solution of the problem of unemployment, it is an alleviation of it, and my experience is that the ordinary man out of work would far rather be in some kind of employment than drawing benefit. The ordinary workman is really more anxious to earn something than to take relief from the guardians or to obtain assistance under the Unemployment Insurance Act.
Very often there is a great deterrent in the way of these people. A man by taking on half-a-day's work may lose practically as much as he gets for that work in benefit, and I have been wondering
whether the Minister of Labour can do anything to ease that situation. It is quite true that a man should not be receiving benefit and simultaneously earning wages, but by Regulations things might be made a little easier for those who are only able to get half a day's work, because it would be helping to keep them in a better physical and moral condition. This problem of the casual job arises in connection with harvest work, which, after all, is not quite so casual. It is not an insured occupation, and I am told that in some of the agricultural districts which adjoin large towns frequently there is some difficulty in obtaining temporary assistance during the harvest from the men who are unemployed in the adjoining town, because, if they start on this harvest work, no stamps are put on their cards, and they may be prejudicing their future position. I ask the Minister of Labour if he can do anything to ease that situation.
There is also another difficulty in this connection which arises from the shortage of houses. Often, this difficulty arises in districts where trade is fairly good, and where there has been a tendency for the population to move into those districts. A man may hear of a job in a certain town, and he finds that he is unable to obtain a house. He may obtain lodgings, but he cannot bring his wife and family with him, and a situation arises in which that man has to pay for lodgings and keep up his home elsewhere. Under these circumstances, the man finds that he cannot meet his obligations, and he is disqualified from benefit for giving up his job. I think those in charge of our employment exchanges, when sending men to jobs a long way from their homes, should be able to inform those men what the prospects are of obtaining housing accommodation. I am sorry for having had to put a number of questions to the Minister of Labour, but they are just a few thoughts which have been running through my mind which I have not had any previous opportunity of putting before the Minister.

Mr. BATEY: I come from a part of the country which in regard to the probblem we are discussing may be justly described as a black area. The Parliamentary
Secretary, in his speech, said that over the whole of the County of Durham the percentage of unemployment is over 22 per cent. He also said that there were parts of the country where the percentage of unemployment was 40 per cent. and even 50 per cent. In my Division, I have a number of those areas, and it is simply heart-breaking to go to those colliery villages only to find the people sinking deeper and deeper into poverty. There seems to be no hope whatever for the people in those mining areas and more especially in the necessitous areas. A week or two ago I had a letter from the secretary of an unemployment committee in my Division, giving the amount of work at the collieries around one of the smaller towns. I will read the names and figures to the Committee, as they will show the Minister how very bad unemployment is in that area. The list is as follows:




Percent working


Roddymoor Colliery
…
70


 Bowden Close Colliery
…
75


Steel House Colliery
…
50


Sunnybrow Colliery
…
None


Wooley Colliery
…
None


Cold Knob Colliery
…
None


Craig Lee Colliery
…
None


McNeil Colliery
…
None


Cabin House Colliery
…
None


That is a very serious state of affairs; I have never known a condition of things like it in the county of Durham during all the time that I have been there. It would not, perhaps, be fair to say that it is typical of the rest of my Division, but, if I were making a guess at the number of men unemployed in my own Division, I think should be safe in guessing that throughout the whole Division it is between 40 and 50 per cent. One is anxious to know what the Government are prepared to do for these "black" areas. because our experience is that the men in these areas have no chance of getting work anywhere else. There are no shipyards, and there is no other work that they can take. They are simply doomed to unemployment and their experience is that, instead of receiving sympathy from the Ministry of Labour, they are being by scores and hundreds cut off from unemployment benefit. It seems that, if the Ministry can get a chance to make an excuse to cut off these men from unemployment benefit, they are cut off, and the result
is that they are forced to go to the guardians. Just recently the Gateshead Board of Guardians issued a circular, to which I want to draw the attention of the Minister, as it is typical of my Division and, I believe, of a good deal of the county of Durham. It is really a speech delivered by the Chairman of the Poor Law Conference at Keswick on the 14th June last, and it is well worth remembering. He said:
It is a matter of grave consequence that there should be the large number of applications to guardians for out-relief from unemployed men.
That is rather an important statement, and I would like to repeat it to the Minister of Labour. This gentleman, who is not connected with a colliery district, said that it is a matter of grave consequence that there should be the large number of applications to guardians for out-relief from unemployed men. It is our experience in the North of England that unemployed men, instead of receiving sympathy from the Ministry of Labour and being relieved out of the Unemployment Fund, in view of the condition in which they are, are being forced to the guardians and compelled to receive relief from the guardians. The gentle- man whom I have been quoting gives as an instance the Gateshead Union. He says:
The present weekly expenditure on outdoor relief alone in Gateshead Union represents a total rate of 6s. 3d. in the £per annum, made up as follows: Ordinary recipients, 1s. 7d.; unemployed cases, 4s. 8d.
He concluded his speech with these words, which the Minister ought to remember:
In industrial areas out-relief has been much swollen by guardians having to take on and maintain unemployed persons and their dependants, where no other provision is made for them. The position seems to be that, when the man's unemployment relief stops, he is generally obliged to go to the guardians, so that, while the number of unemployed is reported by the Labour Exchanges to be decreasing, the number of unemployed relieved by the guardians is increasing.
It is easy for the Minister of Labour to keep showing every month that the numbers of unemployed are decreasing. They may be, but they are simply pushed from the Unemployment Fund on to the guardians, and we believe that that is the last place to which they ought to be
forced to go. There are two other aspects of this matter that I want the Minister to keep in mind. One is with regard to the young men. The policy of the Ministry is not to relieve young men where there is anyone else in the house who is working. I have a case of a young man living in my own Division, at Spennymoor, whose father is an aged miner, drawing the aged miner's benefit. That is all that the father has. There are two other brothers in the house, and, because they are working, this young man has only had three months' benefit. I submit to the Minister that there is no hope of the young men in our mining areas obtaining employment. It is no use their going round to other collieries, as they are continually doing, because it is impossible for them to find employment at the other collieries; and, seeing that it is so difficult for them to find employment at other collieries, the Minister ought to relax that rule, and endeavour to give unemployment benefit to young men as long as it is possible to do so.
There is another ease that I have had only recently, in connection with another class of workmen. In our collieries we have men in regard to whom, when work was good, there was very little trouble, that is to say, men who have been injured in the pits, who have partially recovered, and are certified as being able to do light work. We find that these men are not able to obtain employment at the present time. If a man has been injured and is merely certified as able to do light work, it is useless for him to seek other employment, and we find that these men who are only able to do light work are, like our other people, being cut off from unemployment benefit, so that there is nothing for them except Poor Law relief. I have here the case of a man, 54 years of age, an ex-service man, who had an accident in May, 1922. He received compensation until December, 1923. Then he was certified as able to do light work, and, so long as the colliery concerned was employing its full complement of men, he had light work to do. He was then receiving light work compensation amounting to 3s. 2d. a week. Now the colliery cannot employ him. He has been able to get his light work compensation raised to 17s. 6d. a week, but that man, an ex-service man with a wife
and family, who has to pay 6s. 6d. a week for rent, finds it impossible to get any unemployment benefit.
There was a time, when this Government first came into office, when, if we sent cases like this to the Minister of Labour, we used to meet with some sympathy, and not infrequently we had the cases put right. This particular case I sent to the Ministry of Labour a few weeks ago, and received the reply that, as there was no possibility of the man finding employment, the Ministry could not see their way to give him extended benefit. I submit that the Minister should not treat the dark spots in our mining areas as he would, perhaps, treat other areas. There is no possibility of these men getting work and, therefore, he ought to take the special conditions of those areas into consideration, and see if it is not possible to do something for them in the peculiar circumstances in which they are placed.
I listened to the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to hear whether there was any hope that during the coming winter they would be doing something to help this mass of unemployed. The only remedies he seemed to suggest for the present deplorable condition of affairs were these. He said men would not be allowed to enter the mines unless they were over 18 and had formerly been miners. That is a good thing as far as it goes, but it is a very small step. It is a good thing because it would prevent strangers going into the mines. But, on the other hand, no practical colliery manager, when he can get skilled miners who have been used to the work and understand it, will take strangers, so that it is really a very small step and, all said and done, means very little. It is no solution of this problem. It is a mere flea-bite. It will not do anything towards solving the problem of unemployment in the mines.
The hon. Gentleman laid stress upon another remedy. He said they had been training single men at Brandon and Claydon for the purpose of sending them overseas. That again may be a good thing as far as it goes, but in our opinion these young men should be trained for agriculture in this country and not sent overseas. But it is only young men, and that again is a very small step. You
might double the number, but still it would be a very small step towards solving the problem of unemployment in the mines. I was surprised to hear the hon. Gentleman say wages were relatively as high as in 1921. I think he meant generally for all trades. Certainly it is not correct in connection with the coal mines. Wages are not relatively as high to-day as they were in 1921. The wages paid in March of that year were £21,250,000. In March of this year they were only £9,000,000, and our men have had an hour a day added to their time. So it cannot be argued that wages are relatively as high as in 1921. I think the hon. Gentleman made rather a mistake in that.
The Parliamentary Secretary pleaded for better industrial relations, and he said the state of trade was more satisfactory. That may be true so far as some trades are concerned, but it is certainly not true of the coal industry. Since the Government came into office the coal industry is immensely worse, and therefore they ought to face the responsibility. They ought to realise that they are partly responsible, and they should think, not merely of these summer months, if we can call them summer months, but they should think of the winter that is coming. With the winter that is facing us in the North of England the outlook is extremely black. I should like the Minister to hold out some hope of something we can expect from the Government towards solving this problem of the unemployed miners. The Parliamentary Secretary admitted that there is a large number of unemployed miners who will not be able to find employment again at or in the coal mines. That may be partially due to the Government, and they ought seriously to consider some steps to find work for these men. With the prospects looking so extremely black, as they do at present, we take this opportunity, as we are bound to take every opportunity, of calling attention to the condition of affairs in connection with the mines. I hope the Minister after he has had a holiday—I hope his holiday will not be too long—will try to fathom the question and to find some solution in order to help our unemployed miners.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The Debate to-day has ranged over a very wide
number of questions. Anyone who listens to hon. Members who speak for the mining districts knows quite well the hard times the miners are going through, not in all the mining districts but in many of them, and in some there are peculiarly hard conditions. Parts of Scotland form one snob district, Durham another and part of South Wales a third. Though there are difficulties in the mining industry generally, there are peculiar difficulties in some districts more than in others. I hope to deal with that subject later on. What I should like to recall to the House at present is the general state of the country. It is quite natural that anyone dealing with this subject should lay stress upon the hardships that are suffered where unemployment exists. I am equally clear that it would give a wrong impression and it would be a pity if we did not take into real consideration the broad view of the country as a whole. It does not mean that so far as any palliatives or remedies can be applied to particular cases or particular places they should not be applied, but it would be a pity if a mistaken view were entertained with regard to the country as a whole.
Many of the speeches that have dealt with unemployment and with the darker side of the question, if taken by themselves, would, I am certain, give an entirely erroneous impression of the state of the country as a whole. I say without any hesitation—and I am ready to prove my words up to the hilt—that, broadly speaking, the level of living in this country at this time is as good as it was in 1924, or as it was before the War, or in 1900, or at any period. I say that advisedly and I am ready to give the reasons. If anyone wishes to try and ascertain the level of living in the country, he has to take into account three or four factors acting together. One of those factors is the rate of wages, another is the degree of unemployment, and a third is the cost of living. Before this Debate took place, I asked for figures to be got out for me with some care as to the position of the country both in previous years and now, with regard to these different factors.
There is a very general tendency to compare the present state of affairs, apart From 1924, with the
year just before the War, 1914, or with 1900. Strictly speaking, it is not quite a legitimate comparison, for of the two years in which the standard of living reached its peak, one was 1900 and the other 1914. If anyone wants to make a fair comparison, he should compare the present day with the average of the period rather than with "peak" years. But, even so, the present period, which is a period in which there is a slow improvement, and the country is slowly moving on the upgrade, stands comparison with the best years in the country's history. I have taken the figures for, first of all, the rate of wages, then a series of figures of the amount of employment and unemployment for all those years, and then a third series of the cost of living. If you try and combine those into a single composite table you begin to get somewhat far removed from actualities, but at the same time it is what any real student would do if trying to ascertain the real situation. The result, by combining in one view the rates of wages, the unemployment situation, and the cost of living, is that the present time is at least as good as 1924 and certainly as good as 1914 or 1900, and from another point of view it is better.
There is a fourth factor that also ought to be borne in mind when considering the question carefully. The rates of wages do not tell the whole story. Employment shows you how far those rates of wages are earned day by day, but there is another thing which comes in, and it is not merely time rates, it is the actual earnings. The tendency from earlier years has been, and still is, for an increasing proportion of work to be done on piece work rates, and when improvements are made in an industry, as in the cotton industry, for example, the basis on which the percentage is calculated itself improves. From that point of view also, it is quite clear that there has on the whole been an improvement.

Mr. MacLAREN: Have you taken into account the tendency to increased rates and taxes per capita?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Yes, I have taken into account as far as I can the increase in rates and taxes per capita, which are more than off-set at the present time, from the point of view of the
insured population, by the insurance systems which have been introduced. That is the broad situation so far as the actual figures of unemployment are concerned. I would like to reinforce once again a fact which has been stated by my hon. Friend earlier this afternoon. We look at the figure of the live register when it is published every Wednesday, and we are too apt to forget the total of which this is the unemployed portion. Since 1924, the total of insured persons has increased by nearly half a million, and, therefore, when the figure of the live register remains approximately the same, it is the same number out of a considerable addition to the total, and from that point of view, again, an improvement is shown.

Mr. PALING: Can the right hon. Gentleman give us the comparative figures?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Yes, the actual total at work, I think, is 554,000 more—I will look it up and give the hon. Member the exact figures—that is, over half-a-million on a total of over ten and a half millions.

Mr. PALING: That is not quite what I have in mind. The right hon. Gentleman gave the comparative figures of the cost of living, wages, and unemployment, as between 1914 and 1926, but he did not quote the figures. I wonder if he could.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The number of insured persons increased from 11,664,000 in 1924 to about 12,150,000 at the present time, whereas the total on the register remains the same. As regards the other figures, I would never pin myself to a composite figure for the total, but you have to take these different factors together. Broadly speaking, the rates of wages, taking 1880 as 100, ran from 118 in 1900 to 129 in 1914 and 221 in 1924, and for this month—and I say at once a midsummer month is unduly favourable for comparison so you have to make allowance for that—the figure is 227. From the point of view of employment, taking 1880 as 100, the figures are 103 for 1900, 103 for 1914, 95 for 1924, and 96 for April of 1927.

Mr. E. BROWN: Are those calculated on trade union figures?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: They had to he, perfectly obviously, before the un
employment insurance scheme was introduced, but they have now to be based on unemployment insurance figures. Finally, for the cost of living, again taking 1880 m 100, the figure was round about 82 in 1900, 90 pre-War, 157 in 1924 and 148 in April this year. Those are the different tables which are taken together and viewed together for comparison.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Does the right hon. Gentleman include in the cost of living figures any sort of reference to the changes in the rents which are payable all over the country?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The cost of-living figure is taken on the same basis as previously. There has been a question as to whether it should be recalculated or not, but at present the balance of opinion on all sides is for waiting a little longer.
Let me give just one or two other figures. The hon. Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey), following the suggestion of his predecessors, said that the reduction in unemployment had been caused by taking the people off the unemployment insurance system and putting them on to the rates. I can say categorically that, as far as the present unemployment insurance system is concerned, it is an unemployment insurance system and not a relief system. I have definitely safeguarded that fact. But, at the same time, while keeping it within its nature as an unemployment insurance system and not as a relief system, it is administered with a good deal of discretion and of compassion in those districts where the hardship is greatest. On the other hand, there is nothing to show, as far as the statistics are concerned, that people are driven from insurance on to the rates. [Interruption.] Hon. Members may laugh, but I am now giving the facts. I have had a calculation made which I published as a White Paper, and no one has ventured to criticise or disprove it. I have had it recalculated up to date, and the same result is precisely true at the present time.
We have had an examination of a number of test cases of men who have been disallowed benefit over a period of 14 months. Of the total disallowed, 21 per cent. did not again get insurable employment during the period. This percentage
included all those who died or had emigrated and those who went into some non-insurable employment. The result went to show that the comparative number of those who, because their claims had been disallowed, had to have recourse to the rates was small. I had another test case taken to assure myself on this point. Of those who were disallowed, 9.3 per cent., were having some relief from the rates before and only 3 and a half per cent., because of the disallowance, had to have an increase in the help that was given to them from the rates. Of the remaining 90 per cent. and more who had not been in receipt of poor relief before, 8 per cent., and no more, had recourse within the next fortnight to the rates. Broadly speaking, it means that of the disallowances in these test cases over 88 per cent. never went and received any more relief from the rates. [Interruption.]

Mr. MACKINDER: Would the right hon. Gentleman say how it is that when figures are asked for here as to the number of persons who have gone for relief after having been turned off from unemployment benefit, we have not been able to get them? Yet the right hon. Gentleman can quote them to-night.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I give this test case which we had for our own information. [Interruption.] I will gladly give hon. Members, and the hon. Member who asked the question, all the information I have about it. It is precisely the kind of information that I ought to get from my Department, and I will gladly and freely give it to hon. Members opposite.

Mr. HAYES: Has the right hon. Gentleman received a protest from the West Derby Board of Guardians, Liverpool, as to the increase in the Poor Law relief consequent upon these removals from unemployment benefit?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I may have received it though I do not remember it. [Interruption.] I give the facts as I have them, and apply them. It is perfectly obvious that every board of guardians, naturally, would like to have those who are in receipt of relief taken off its shoulders and given State relief out of State funds. But the un-employment
insurance scheme is not a State relief scheme.
The fact, as I say, is that, broadly speaking, the level of living in this country is at this moment at least as high as it was in 1924, and at least as high as in any of the best years preceding the War.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Preston (Mr. T. Shaw) put a question at the opening of the Debate, and it amounts to this: "Even if it is so, why has there not been a greater improvement since 1924?" The hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. Mac-Laren) I think, tried to supply the answer. He said, "What are the principles of Conservatism? Can you expect any action to be taken?" We do not take our definition of the principles of Conservatism from the hon. Member for Burslem however pleasantly he puts it. The principles of Conservatism are these: We differ from the old Liberalism in that we do not allow things simply to take their own course, and we differ from modern Socialism in that we do not want the State to undertake managerial functions. What we want is to lay down minimum standards of proper behaviour and of the proper conduct of industry, standards which should advance by degrees; to lay down those minimum standards and, except in exceptional cases, to allow private enterprise to have free play. This is a policy which is different in kind from the policies of the other two parties. Where there are quite exceptional cases we are prepared, without hesitation, to deal with them.
With regard to what can be done, there are two distinct lines of action. Of one of these I heartily approve, and of the other I heartily disapprove. The line of action of which I would approve is to try to see how far we can help to retain people in industry. It is for that reason we started training centres. My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary has announced an increase in the training centres to about double their present size. I would gladly see them increased much further. On the other hand, for reasons which I hope to explain briefly, I would not do that until the public finance is in a, better state than at the present time, because the balance of loss is greater than the gain. In the same way
in the case of juvenile unemployment centres, I would gladly see them maintained and, where needed, increased; but I do not think that you can expect to have instruction in them of the type That you would get at a continuation school, nor must you treat them merely as a boys' club. What you can expect to get in them, as has been done in the voluntary centres in which I helped in times past, is, that you can help to maintain and to increase the boys' and girls' interest in industry and their capacity for it. I am sure, however, that it is not possible to give them a long system of instruction, for the very reason that in so far as they are unemployment centres you want to get the juveniles back into industry as soon as possible, and prolonged instruction is not, therefore, possible.

Mr. COVE: What are you going to do with them?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Let them go back to work, when they are of age, as soon as employment offers.

Mr. COVE: I mean, what are you going to do with the unemployment centres?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Maintain them in those districts where there is any considerable degree of unemployment. The hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) asked about settlement upon the land. I am afraid that I cannot deal with that question, because I am not the Minister of Agriculture; but I can say this, that the hon. Member is quite mistaken if he thinks that there is no liaison at the present time between the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Agriculture. As far as harvest work is concerned, we are in touch with them, and as far as work is required in regard to beet sugar we are in touch with them, and if and when there are schemes which are required for absorbing any section of the population in agriculture we are in touch with them for dealing with a matter of that kind. As far as placing is concerned, everyone knows the difficulties we had last year. Every inducement is given at the present time and every encouragement in every Exchange, to see that the task of placing men in work is developed on the best lines. That, I candidly say, is far and away the best of any tests for genuinely seeking work. It is for that reason that
we are bending our efforts in that direction.
On the other hand, there is a type of policy to which I do not subscribe, and that is the policy of relief schemes for work. There may be one or two schemes which are worth doing, but they are the exceptions and not the rule. The hon. Member for Dundee made an interesting speech on that subject this afternoon. Where there may be an exception and where it can be proved to be worth it, where the facts and figures will warrant it, then I would support it gladly, but it would have to be borne out absolutely by the facts and the figures, otherwise I am quite clear in my own mind that relief works do more harm than good.

Mr. MACKINDER: They cost money, that is your trouble.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: They cost the country money and they cost the country employment in other ways. The essence of the business is this: it is an easy thing to see the men who are employed, say, on making a road or levelling a park or doing a piece of work which is not really much anticipated; it is easy to see a certain number of men being given employment on work of that kind but it means that work of a much healthier kind is curtailed in other directions, and that is why I am against it. There is, I will not say a fixed quantum of credit in this country, but there is credit which if it is used to-day for relief works, which are not the best economic kind of work for any set of men, will not be available to be spent in the expansion of industry which is of a much more useful kind. The amount of credit available in the country at this moment is smaller than before the dispute of last year and, therefore, the need is greater that an undue amount should not be spent on relief work which diminishes employment of a natural kind in other directions.

Mr. PALING: You can get credit anywhere.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The hon. Member says that you can get credit anywhere.

Mr. MACKINDER: You can send it anywhere.

Mr. PALING: Where the percentage is big enough.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The right hon. Member for Preston said why not bet out-of-work schemes in order to make up to 1924. My answer is that it would make the position worse and not better. In considering why the figures to-day are not better than those for 1924, the right hon. Gentleman did not mention the coal dispute of last year. If there is responsibility to be fixed anywhere for the lack of improvement between 1924 and now, the responsibility began with the absolutely mistaken influence of the Government of 1924 in asking for an increase in the coal industry, when a plain view of the facts showed that it was absolutely unwarranted and would be calamitous to the industry.

Mr. PALING: You have remedied that.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The right hon. Gentleman's figures were misleading. He quoted the increase in wages in the first half of 1924.

Mr. SHAW: May I say that you are wrong?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: They were figures supplied to the right hon. Gentleman the gist of which he has not fully understood. He quoted figures of increase in the first six months of 1924 to compare the present day with the same day in 1924. What he did not realise was that the great bulk of that increase in wages in 1924 came in the coal industry and that the coal industry, with a month's ascertainments and a month afterwards before the wages were paid, had a lag of two months.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman correct when he says that the increase for the first six months in 1924 was in the coal trade, when it did not operate before the 1st April?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: In 1924, there was an increase in weekly wages in the mining industry of £302,000 in the first six months. Those were the figures which the right hon. Gentleman gave. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Yes. In 1924 the whole of that increase was given as in the first six months by the right hon. Gentleman, who used the figures to show that there was an up-grade through the first half of 1924. There was nothing of the kind. The coal industry had passed the peak of
its prosperity by the middle of 1924. The figures which he gave had a lag of two months. The figures for June related to April, the figures for July related to May. If he had taken the state of the industry in June, reflected in the returns for August, he would have found that the industry had passed its peak of prosperity and was on the down grade again. That is a matter of common knowledge to everyone who knows the industry. It was existing on a basis of artificial prosperity up to the end of the Ruhr occupation. When that occupation came to an end it meant the prosperity of the industry lasted for a few months later owing to the contracts which had been made, but it was plain that a hard time was in store which would not unlikely result in trouble in the future. It was the perfectly calamitous mistake of the Labour Government of 1924 which started the trouble which has existed from then until now, and the responsibility lies on the Government of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member. There is, however, this real difference in the state of affairs between now and three years ago. There are 170,000 more miners out of work now than there were three years ago, and there are 170,000 fewer out of work in the other trades of the country. That is the fundamental difference.
As regards the miners, the collapse in employment in the coal industry was absolutely bound to come after the artificial prosperity due to the Ruhr occupation. Every hon. Member who represents a mining constituency knows that perfectly well. The hon. Member for Spennymoor says that our policy of limited recruitment and training is only a small thing. He knows that it is not a small thing. It affects 20,000 to 30,000 people, and even as regards the number of men employed in the mining industry that is not a small figure. The pity of it is that we have not been able to get it until now; and the hon. Member knows the reason why. If the hon. Member asks whether it is possible to employ 150,000 men on relief work, I say that it is not possible, but what is possible is to do what we can to alleviate the situation and deal with it by limitation of recruitment and by training, recognising that it does not meet the whole of the difficulty. At the same time we must try and get the
absorptive power of other industries working as well. Take the shale mining industry, which has been very hard hit. Half the men that were out have been absorbed. If we could get the absorptive power of industry all round to work, it would absorb bigger numbers than any amount of artificial help that could be given. While there has been trouble in the coal mining industry, cheaper fuel and cheaper transport have been largely responsible for the improvement in other industries I am sorry

that I am not able to develop this point further this evening owing to the exigencies of time.

It being Ten of the Clock, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution under consideration.

Question put, "That '£7,303,564' stand part of the Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 302; Noes, 142.

Division No. 296.]
AYES.
[10.0 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cope, Major William
Hartington, Marquess of


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.
Haslam. Henry c.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hawke, John Anthony


Applin, Colonel R. V, K.
Crooke. J. Smedley (Deritend)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Apsley, Lord
Crookshank. Cpt. H. (Lindsey. Gainsbro)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Henderson. Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)


Astor, Viscountess
Dalkeith, Earl of
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Atkinson, C.
Davidson. J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Davidson, Major-General sir J. H
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Balniel, Lord
Davies. Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset. Yeovil)
Hills, Major John Waller


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hilton, Cecil


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Dixey, A. C.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Drewe, C.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forlar)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Edmondson, MajorA. J.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Berry, Sir George
Ellis, R. G.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Bethel, A.
Elveden. Viscount
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Betterton, Henry B.
England, Colonel A.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. -M.)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hume, Sir G. H.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Huntingfield, Lord


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hurd, Percy A.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Briscoe, Richard George
Fermoy, Lord
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Finburgh, S.
Jephcott, A. R.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Ford. Sir P. J.
Jones, G W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Henham)
Forrest, W.
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newo'y)
Foster, sir Harry S.
Kinloch-Cooke. Sir Clement


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Bullock. Captain M.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Lamb, J. Q.


Burman, J. B.
Fremantle. Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Butt. Sir Alfred
Ganzonl, Sir John
Lloyd. Cyril E. (Dudley)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Gates, Percy
Locker-Lampson. G. (Wood Green)


Caine, Gordon Hall
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Campbell. E. T.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Loder. J. de V.


Cassels, J. D.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Long, Major Eric


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Goff. Sir Park
Looker, Herbert William


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. H. (Prtsmth. S.)
Gower, Sir Robert
Lougher. Lewis


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Grace, John
Lowe, Sir Francis William


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hush Vere


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Luce, Maj. -Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Lumley. L. R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Macintyre, Ian


Christie, J. A.
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristrol, N.)
McLean, Major A.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Clarry, Reginald George
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Macquisten, F. A.


Clayton, G. C
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hail, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Maitland. Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Hanbury, C.
Malone. Major P. B.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Colman, N. C. D.
Harland, A.
Margesson, Captain D.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Marriott. Sir J. A. R


Cooper, A. Duff
Harrison, G. J. C.
Meller, R. J.


Merriman, F. B.
Remer, J. R.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Remnant, Sir James
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Rentoul, G. S.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Rice, Sir Frederick
Tinne, J. A.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Richardson, sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Ropner, Major L.
Waddington, R.


Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Rye, F. G.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Salmon, Major I.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Neville. Sir Reginald J.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Newman, Sir R. H. S, D. L. (Exeter)
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Warrender, Sir Victor


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Nleid, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Sandon, Lord
Watts, Dr. T.


Nuttall, Ellis
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wells, S. R.


Oakley, T.
Savery, S. S.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple-


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Sinclair. Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst.)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Pennefather, Sir John
Skelton, A. N.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Penny, Frederick George
Slaney, Major P. Kenyan
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dlne, c.)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Withers, John James


Perring, Sir William George
Smithers, Waldron
Wolmer, Viscount


Peto, sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Womersley, W. J.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Philipson, Mabel
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.),


Pilcher, G.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Pilditch, Sir Philip
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Preston, William
Storry-Deans, R.
Wragg, Herbert


Price. Major C. W. M.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Radford, E. A.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Raine, Sir Walter
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser



Ramsden. E.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Templeton, W. P
Commander B. Eyres Monsell and


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Major Sir George Hennessy


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Mosley, Oswald


Adamson, W. M. (Staff, Cannock)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Naylor, T. E.


Ammon, Charles George
Groves, T.
Oliver, George Harold


Attlee, Clement Richard
Grundy, T. W.
Palln, John Henry


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling. W.


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertlilery)
Hardle, George D.
Potts, John S.


Barnes, A.
Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, H. (Houghton-ie-Spring)


Batey, Joseph
Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Ritson, J.


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, G. H.
Rose, Frank H.


Bromfield, William
Hirst, W. (Bradford, south)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Bromley, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Scrymgeour, E.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hudson, J, H. (Huddersfield),
Scurr, John


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sexton, James


Buchanan, G.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Clowes, S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Short, Alfred(Wednesbury)


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, J, J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Sitch, Charles H.


Compton, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.
Smillie, Robert


Connolly, M.
Kennedy, T.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Cove, W. G.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kirkwood, D
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lansbury, George
Snell, Harry


Dalton, Hugh
Lawrence, Susan
Stamford, T. W.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Day, Colonel Harry
Lee, F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Dennison, R.
Lindley, F. W.
Strauss, E. A.


Duncan, C.
Livingstone, A. M.
Sutton, J. E.


Dunnico, H.
Lowth, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Edge, Sir William
Lunn, William
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Mackinder, W.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Fenby, T. D.
MacLaren, Andrew
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gardner, J. P.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Thurtle, Ernest


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
March, S.
Townend, A. E.


Gibbins, Joseph
Maxton, James
Trevelyan, Ht. Hon. C. P.


Gillett, George M.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Viant, S. P.


Gosling, Harry
Montague, Frederick
Wallhead, Richard C.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Morris, R. H.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)




Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Windsor, Walter


Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)



Wellock, Wilfred
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Westwood, J
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whiteley.


Wilkinson, Ellen C.

Question put,

"That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

The House divided: Ayes, 316; Noes, 140.

Division No. 297.]
AYES.
[10. 12p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hilton, Cecil


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Dalkeith, Earl of
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd. Hemel Hempst'd)
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Apsley, Lord
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovll)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Astor, Viscountess
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Howard-Bury, Lieut. Colonel C. K.


Atkinson, C.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney. N.)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dixey, A. C.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumbent'nd, Whiten'n)


Balniel, Lord
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hume, Sir G. H.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Drewe, C.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Huntingfield, Lord


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Hurd, Percy A.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Ellis, R. G.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Elveden, Viscount
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
England, Colonel A.
Jephcott, A. R.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Bennett, A. J.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Everard, W. Lindsay
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Berry, Sir George
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Bethel, A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Betterton, Henry B.
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Lamb, J. Q.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Fermoy, Lord
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Finburgh, S.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Forrest, W.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Briscoe, Richard George
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Loder, J. de V.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Long, Major Eric


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Looker, Herbert William


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lougher, Lewis


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Lowe, Sir Francis William


Brown, Brig. Gen. H.C (Berks, Newb'y)
Galbraith, J. F. W
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Ganzonl, Sir John
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Bullock, Captain M.
Gates, Percy
Lumley, L. R.


Burman, J. B.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Goff, Sir Park
Macintyre, Ian


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Gower, Sir Robert
McLean, Major A.


Calne, Gordon Hall
Grace, John
Macmillan, Captain H.


Campbell, E. T.
Grant, Sir J. A.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Cassels, J. D.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Macquisten, F. A.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Malone, Major P. B.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Guest. Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Margesson, Captain D.


Chapman, Sir S.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Mason, Lieut-Col. Glyn K.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Meller, R. J.


Christie, J. A.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Merriman, F. B.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hanbury, C.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Clarry, Reginald George
Harland, A.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Clayton, G. C.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Harrison, G. J. C.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hartington, Marquess of
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Moreing, Captain A. H.


Colfox, Major Wm. Philips
Haslam, Henry C.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Colman, N. C. D.
Hawke, John Anthony
Murchison, Sir Kenneth


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Cooper, A. Duff
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Nelson, Sir Frank


Cope, Major William
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L, (Exeter)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Newton, sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Crooke, J. Smedrey (Deritend)
Hills, Major John Waller
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Nuttall, Ellis
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Oakley, T.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Waddington, R.


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sandon, Lord
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Savery, S. S.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Pennefather, Sir John
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Penny, Frederick George
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Shepperson, E. W.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Watts Dr. T.


Perring, Sir William George
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)
Wells, S. R.


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Burnstaple)
Skelton, A. N.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple-


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Philipson, Mabel
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Pilcher, G.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Pilditch, Sir Philip
Smithers, Waldron
Wilson, R. R. Stafford, Lichfield


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Preston, William
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Price, Major C. W. M.
Stanley, Lieut-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Radford, E. A.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Withers, John James


Ralne, Sir Walter
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wolmer, Viscount


Ramsden, E.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Womersley, W. J.


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Storry-Deans, R.
Wood, E. (Chester, Staly'b'ge & Hyde)


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W,)


Remer, J. R.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Remnant, Sir James
Sueter Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Rentoul, G. S.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Rice, Sir Frederick
Templeton, W. P.
Wragg, Herbert


Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)



Ropner, Major L.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W Mitchell-
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Rye F. G.
Tinne J. A.
Commander B. Eyres Monsell and


Salmon, Major I.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Major sir George Hennessy


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham]
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hardle, George D.
Scrymgeour, E.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Harris, Percy A.
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday Arthur
Sexton, James


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hirst, G. H.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Baker, Walter
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barnes, A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Batey, Joseph
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Smillie, Robert


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Bromley, J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith Rennie (Penistone)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Snell, Harry


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stamford,T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Kelly, W. T.
Stephen, Campbell


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kennedy, T.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Strauss, E. A.


Clowes, S.
Kirkwood, D
Button, J. E.


Cluse, W. S.
Lansbury, George
Taylor, R. A.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Lawrence, Susan
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Compton, Joseph
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Connolly, M.
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cove, W. G.
Lindley, F. W.
Thurtle, Ernest


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Livingstone, A. M.
Townend, A. E.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lowth, T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Mackinder, W.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dennison, R.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Duncan, C.
March, S.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dunnico, H.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Palsley)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Edge, Sir William
Montague, Frederick
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Morris, R. H.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Fenby, T. D.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wellock, Wilfred


Gardner, J. P.
Mosley, Oswald
Westwood, J.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Murnin, H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T. E.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Gillett, George M
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenall, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, R. J. Jarrow)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Walter


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Riley, Ben



Groves, T.
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Rose, Frank H.
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whitely.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Saklatvala, Shapurji

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: then proceeded to put forth with the Questions, "That this House cloth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Classes I to IX of the Civil Estimates, and of the Navy Estimates, the Army Esimates, the Air Estimates, and the Revenue Departments Estimates.

CIVIL ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1927.

CLASS I.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class I of the Civil Estimates.

The House divided: Ayes, 320; Noes,142.

Division No. 298]
AYES.
[10.23 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Colman, N. C. D.
Harland, A.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cooper, A. Duff
Harrison, G. J. C.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hartington, Marquess of


Apsley, Lord
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Haslam, Henry C.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hawke, John Anthony


Astor, Viscountess
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Atkinson, C
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Curzon, Captain viscount
Henderson. Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)


Balniel, Lord
Dalkeith, Earl of
Heneage, Lieut. Col. Arthur P.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Davies, Maj Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hills, Major John Waller


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hilton, Cecil


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Dixey, A. C.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Bellairs Commander Cariyon W.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Drewe, C.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Bennett A. J.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Berry Sir George
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir, Robert S.


Bethel, A.
Ellis, R. G.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Betterton Henry B.
Elveden, Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
England, Colonel A.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hume, Sir G. H.


Blades sir George Rowland
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Everard W. Lindsay
Hunting field, Lord


Bowyer Capt. G. E.W.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hurd, Percy A.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Falle sir Bertram G.
Hurst' Gerald B.


Briscoe, Richard George.
Falls sir Charles F
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H


Britain Sir Harry
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fermoy, Lord
Jephcott, A. R.


Booke Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Fielden, E. B.
Jones, G. W. H. (stoke Newington)


Brown, col. D. C.(N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Finburgh, S.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Ford, Sir P. J.
Kindersley, Major Guy M.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Kinloch-cooke, Sir Clement


Bullock, Captain M.
Forrest, W.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Burman, J. B.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lane Fox. Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fremantie, Lieut-Colonel Francis E.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Butt, Sir Alfred
Gadle Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Caine, Gordon Hall
Ganzonl, Sir John
Locker-Lampson, Com. O (Handsw'th)


Campbell, E. T.
Gates Percy
Loder, J. de V.


Cassels, J. D.
Gault Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Long, Major Eric


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Looker, Herbert William


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lougher, Lewis


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Goff, Sir Park
Lowe, Sir Francis William


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Gower, Sir Robert
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Grace, John
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Lumley, L. R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (l. of W.)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Christie, J. A.
Greenwood. Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Macintyre, Ian


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
McLean, Major A.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Macmillan, Captain H.


Clarry, Reginald George
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
McNeil, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Clayton, G. C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Hall, Capt. W. D' A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Malone, Major P. B.


Cohen, Major J. Brunei
Hanbury, C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Margesson, Captain D.
Raine, Sir Walter
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Ramsden, E.
Templeton, W. P.


Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Meller, R. J.
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen South)


Merriman, F. B.
Remer, J. R.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Remnant, Sir James
Tinne, J. A.


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Rentoul, G. S.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M
Rice, Sir Frederick
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Waddington, R.


Morden, Col. W. Grant
Ropner, Major L.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Rye, F. G.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Salmon, Major I.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Nelson, Sir Frank
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sandon, Lord
Watts, Dr. T.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wells, S. R.


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Savery, S. S.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Nuttall, Ellis
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Oakley, T.
Shepperson, E. W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon Hugh
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Skelton A. N.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Staney, Major P. Kenyon
Wise, Sir Fredric


Pennefather, Sir John
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Withers, John James


Penny, Frederick George
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wolmer, Viscount


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smithers, Waldron
Womersley, W. J


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Perring, Sir William George
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W.)


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Philipson, Mabel
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon Sir L.


Plicher, G.
Storry-Deans, R.
Wragg, Herbert


Pilditch, Sir Philip
Streatfeild, Captain S. R
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Preston, William
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)



Price, Major C. W. M.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Radford, E. A.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Major Cope and Captain Lord




Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Gillett, George M.
Mackinder, W.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Gosling, Harry
MacLaren, Andrew


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)


Ammon, Charles George
Greenall, T.
March, S.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)


Baker, Walter
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Montague, Frederick


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertlilery)
Groves, T.
Morris, R. H.


Batey, Joseph
Grundy, T. W.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hall, F. (York., W. R., Normanton)
Mosley, Oswald


Broad, F. A.
Hall G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Murnin, H.


Bromfield, William
Hardie, George D.
Naylor, T. E.


Bromley, J,
Harris, Percy A.
Oliver, George Harold


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hayday, Arthur
Palin, John Henry


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hayes, John Henry
Paling, W.


Buchanan, G.
Hirst, G. H.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Potts, John S.


Charleton, H. C.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Clowes, S.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Riley, Ben


Cluse, W.S.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Ritson, J.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Rose, Frank H.


Compton, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Connolly, M.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Cove, W. G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Scrymgeour, E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Scurr, John


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jonen, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Sexton, James


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas(Preston)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Day, Colonel Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M,
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dennison, R.
Kirkwood, D.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Duncan, C.
Lansbury, George
Sitch, Charles H.


Dunnico, H.
Lawrence, Susan
Smillie, Robert


Edge, Sir William
Lawson, John James
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lee, F.
Smith, H. B. Lees-(Keighley)


Fenby, T. D.
Lindley, F. W.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Gardner, J. P.
Livingstone, A. M.
Snell, Harry


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lowth, T.
Stamford, T. W.


Gibbins, Joseph
Lunn, William
Stephen, Campbell




Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Viant, S. P.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Strauss, E. A.
Wallhead, Richard C.
Williams, C P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Sutton, J. E.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Taylor, R. A.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Williams, Dr J. H. (Llanelly)


Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Windsor, Walter


Thurtie, Ernest
Wellock, Wilfred
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Townend, A. E.
Westwood, J.



Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Whiteley, W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. A. Barnes.

CLASS II

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions

reported in respect of Class II of the Civil Estimates."

The House divided: Ayes, 333; Noes, 133

Division No. 299.]
AYES.
[10.35 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Colman, N. C. D.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Apsley, Lord
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hocking, Captain Douglas H.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cooper, A. Duff
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Astor, Viscountess
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hanbury, C.


Atkinson, C.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Harland, A.


Balniel, Lord
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hartington, Marquess of


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Dalkeith, Earl of
Haslam, Henry C.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Davidson, J. (Hertl'd, Hemel Hemosl'd)
Hawke, John Anthony


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davies. Dr. Vernon
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)


Bennett, A. J.
Dean, Arthur Wellosley
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Dixey, A. C.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Berry, Sir George
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hennessy. Major Sir G. R, J.


Bethel, A.
Drewe C.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Betterton, Henry B.
Edge, Sir William
Hills, Major John Waller


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hilton, Cecil


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hogg, Ht. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Ellis, R. G.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Elveden, Viscount
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Braithwalte, Major A. N.
England, Colonel A.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Briscoe, Richard George
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie


Brittain, Sir Harry
Everard, W. Lindsay
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Fenby, T. D.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Bullock, Captain M.
Fermoy, Lord
Huntingfield, Lord


Burman, J. B.
Fielden, E. B.
Hurd, Percy A.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Finburgh, S.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Ford, Sir P. J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Forrest, W.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Calne, Gordon Hall
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Jephcott, A. R.


Campbell, E. T.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Cassels, J. D.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Ganzonl, Sir John
Knox, Sir Alfred


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gates, Percy
Lamb, J. Q.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Lister, Cunlifie, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Goff, Sir Park
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Christie, J. A.
Gower, Sir Robert
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Grace, John
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handw'th)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Loder, J. de V.


Clarry, Reginald George
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Long, Major Eric


Clayton, G. C.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Looker, Herbert William


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Lougher, Lewis


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Perring, Sir William George
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Lumley, L. R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Philipson, Mabel
Sykes, Major-Gen, Sir Frederick H.


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Pilcher, G.
Templeton, W. P.


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Macintyre, Ian
Preston, William
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


McLean, Major A.
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Macmillan, Captain H.
Radford, E. A.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Raine, Sir Walter
Tinne, J. A.


Macquisten, F. A.
Ramsden, E.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Remer, J. R.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Malone, Major P. B.
Remnant, Sir James
Waddington, R.


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Rentoul, G. S.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Margesson, Capt. D.
Rice-Sir Frederick
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Meller, R. J.
Ropner, Major L.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Merriman, F. B.
Rye, F. G
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Salmon, Major I.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Samuel, A. M. (Burrey, Farnham)
Watts, Dr. T.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sandeman, N, Stewart
Wells, S. R.


Moore, Lieut.-Col. T. C. R. (Ayr)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sandon, Lord
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Morden, Col. W. Grant
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Savery, S. S.
William, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Morris, R. H
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Wilson, R. R, (Stafford, Lichfield)


Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Shepperson, E, W.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George.


Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Nelson, Sir Frank
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Wise, Sir Fredric


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
Withers, John James


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Skelton, A. N.
Wolmer, Viscount


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Womersley, W. J.


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine. C.)
Wood, E. (Chestr, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Nield Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W.)


Nuttall, Ellis
Smithers, Waldron
Wood, Sir S. Hill-(High Peak)


Oakley, T.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon Hugh
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Wragg, Herbert


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Pennefather, Sir John
Storry-Deans, R.



Penny, Frederick George
Strauss, E. A.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Major Cope and Captain Lord




Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Duncan, C.
Kennedy, T.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dunnico, H.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Kirkwood, D.


Ammon, Charles George
Gardner, J. P.
Lansbury, George


Attlee, Clement Richard
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lawrence, Susan


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Gibbins, Joseph
Lawson, John James


Baker, Walter
Gillett, George M.
Lee, F.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Gosling, Harry
Lindley, F. W.


Batey, Joseph
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Livingstone, A. M.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Greenall, T.
Lowth, T.


Broad, F. A.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lunn, William


Bromfield, William
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mackinder, W.


Bromley, J.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
MacLaren, Andrew


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Groves, T.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Grundy, T. W.
March, S.


Buchanan, G.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Maxton, James


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Palsley)


Charleton, H. C.
Hardie, George D.
Montague, Frederick


Clowes, S.
Harris, Percy A.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Cluse, W. S.
Hayday, Arthur
Mosley, Oswald


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hayes, John Henry
Murnin, H.


Compton, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Naylor, T. E.


Connolly, M.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Oliver, George Harold


Cove, W. G.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield).
Palin, John Henry


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Paling, W.


Dalton, Hugh
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Potts, John S.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Day, Colonel Harry
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Riley, Ben


Dennison, R.
Kelly, W. T.
Ritson, J.




Rose, Frank H.
Snell, Harry
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Saklatvala, Shapurji
Stamford, T. W.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Salter, Dr. Alfred
Stephen, Campbell
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Scrymgeour, E.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wellock, Wilfred


Scurr, John
Sutton, J. E.
Westwood, J.


Sexton, James
Taylor, R. A.
Whiteley, W.


Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Thurtle, Ernest
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Townend, A. E.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Sitch, Charles H.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Smillie, Robert
Viant, S. P.
Windsor, Walter


Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Ratherhithe)
Wallhead, Richard C.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen



Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. A. Barnes.

CLASS III.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions

reported in respect of Class III of the Civil Estimates."

The House divided: Ayes, 313; Noes, 144.

Division No. 300.]
AYES.
[10.47 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Clayton, G. C.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cockerill, Brig. -General Sir George
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Apsley, Lord
Collox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Colman, N. C. D.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J (Kent, Dover)
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Astor, Viscountess
Cooper, A. Duff
Hall, Capt. W. D' A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Atkinson, C.
Cope, Major William
Hanbury, C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Balniel, Lord
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Harland, A.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hartington, Marquess of


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Haslam, Henry C.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hawke, John Anthony


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Henderson. Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)


Berry, Sir George
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Bethel, A.
Dixey, A. C.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Betterton, Henry B.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Drewe, C.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hills, Major John Waller


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Hilton, Cecil


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hoare, Lt-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Ellis, R. G.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Briscoe, Richard George
Elveden, Viscount
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brittain, Sir Harry
England, Colonel A.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C (Berks, Newb'y)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Falls, Sir Bertram G.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)


Bullock, Captain M.
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Burman, J. B.
Fermoy, Lord
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Fielden, E. B.
Huntingfield, Lord


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Finburgh, S.
Hurd, Percy A.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Forrest, W.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Caine, Gordon Hall
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen't)


Campbell, E. T.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Jephcott, A. R.


Cassels, J. D.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E
Kidd, J. Linlithgow)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Ganzonl, Sir John
Lamb, J. Q.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gates, Percy.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Chapman, Sir S.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Goff, Sir Park
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Christie, J. A.
Gower, Sir Robert
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Grace, John
Loder, J. de V.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Long, Major Eric


Looker, Herbert William
Penny, Frederick George
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Lougher, Lewis
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Perring, Sir William George
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Lumley, L. R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Philipson, Mabel
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Pilcher, G.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Tinne, J. A.


Macintyre, Ian
Preston, William
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


McLean, Major A.
Price, Major C. W. M.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Macmillan, Captain H.
Radford, E. A.
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Raine, Sir Walter
Vaugnan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Macquisten, F. A.
Ramsden, E.
Waddington, R.


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Remer, J. R.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W


Malone, Major P. B.
Remnant, Sir James
Warrender, Sir Victor


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Rice, Sir Frederick
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Margesson, Captain D.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Mason, Lieut-Col. Glyn K.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Watts, Dr. T.


Meller, R. J.
Ropner, Major L.
Wells, S. R.


Merriman, F. B.
Rye, F. G.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Salmon, Major I.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Samuel, A M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Monsell, Eyres, Com, Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Moore, Lieut-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. I. T. C.
Sandon, Lord
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earn


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Savery, S. S.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Withers, John James


Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Wolmer, Viscount


Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Shepperson, E. W.
Womersley, W. J.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Skelton, A. N.
Wood, Sir S. Hill-(High Peak)


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wragg, Herbert


Nuttall, Ellis
Smithers, Waldron
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Oakley, T.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.



O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Bowyer.


Pennefather, Sir John
Steel, Major Samuel Strang



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife. West)
Duncan, C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dunnico, H.
Kelly, W. T.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Edge, Sir William
Kennedy, T.


Ammon, Charles George
Fenby, T. D.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gardner, J. P.
Kirkwood, D.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lansbury, George


Baker, Walter
Gibbins, Joseph
Lawrence, Susan


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Gillett, George M.
Lawson, John James


Barnes, A.
Gosling, Harry
Lee, F.


Batey, Joseph
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lindley, F. W.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Greenall, T.
Livingstone, A. M.


Broad, F. A.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lowth, T.


Bromfield, William
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lunn, William


Bromley, J,
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Mackinder, W.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Groves, T.
MacLaren, Andrew


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Grundy, T. W.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)


Buchanan, G.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
March, S.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)


Charleton, H. C.
Hardie, George D.
Montague, Frederick


Clowes, S.
Harris, Percy A.
Morris, R. H.


Cluse, W. S.
Hayday, Arthur
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Mosley, Oswald


Compton, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Murnin, H.


Connolly, M.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Naylor, T. E.


Cove, W. G.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie
Oliver, George Harold


Cowan, D, M. (Scottish Universities)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Palin, John Henry


Crawfurd, H. E.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Paling, W.


Dalton, Hugh
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Potts, John S.


Day, Colonel Harry
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Dennison, R.
Jones, J. J, (West Ham, Silvertown)
Riley, Ben




Ritson, J.
Snell, Harry
Watts Morgan, Lt-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Rose, Frank H.
Stamford, T. W.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Saklatvala, Shapurji
Stephen, Campbell
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Salter, Dr. Alfred
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wellock, Wilfred


Scrymgeour, E.
Strauss, E. A.
Westwood, J.


Scurr, John
Sutton, J. E.
Whiteley, W.


Sexton, James
Taylor, R. A.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Shaw, Rt. Hon Thomas (Preston)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham.)


Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Thurtle, Ernest
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Townend, A. E.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Sitch, Charles H.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Windsor, Walter


Smillie, Robert
Viant, S. P.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Wallhead, Richard C.



Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.

CLASS IV.

Question,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class IV of the Civil Estimates.

put, and agreed to.

CLASS V.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class V of the Civil Estimates.

The House divided: Ayes, 330; Noes, 131.

Division No. 301.]
AYES.
[10.58 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Chapman, Sir S.
Finburgh, S.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Ford, Sir P. J.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Christie, J. A.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Forrest, W.


Apsley, Lord
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Clarry, Reginald George
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Clayton, G. C.
Fraser, Captain Ian


Astor, Viscountess
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fremantle, Lieut-Colonel Francis E.


Atkinson, C.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gadle, Lieut.-Colonel Anthony


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cockerill, Brig. -General Sir George
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Balniel, Lord
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Ganzonl, Sir John


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gates, Percy


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Colman, N. C. D.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Cooper, A. Duff
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cope, Major William
Goff Sir Park


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gower, Sir Robert


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Grace, John


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Grant, Sir J. A.


Bennett, A. J.
Crawfurd, H. E.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Berry, Sir George
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bethel, A.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)


Betterton, Henry B.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Guest, Capt Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Dalkeith, Earl of
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Davidson, J. (Hertl'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Briscoe, Richard George
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hanbury, C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Dixey, A. C.
Harland, A.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Drewe, C.
Harrison, G. J. C.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Edge, Sir William
Hartington, Marquess of


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Bullock, Captain M.
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Haslam, Henry C.


Burman, J. B.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hawke, John Anthony


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Ellis, R. G,
Headlam, Lieut-Colonel C. M.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Elveden, Viscount
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Butt, Sir Alfred
England, Colonel A.
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Caine, Gordon Hall
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Campbell, E. T.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Cassels, J. D.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hills, Major John Waller


Cayzer. Maj. Sir Herbt. H. (Prtsmth. S.)
Falls. Sir Charles F.
Hilton, Cecil


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Bt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Fenby, T. D.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fermoy, Lord
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fielden, E. B.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Smithers, Waldron


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Morris, R. H.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Hume, Sir G. H.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Nelson, Sir Frank
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Huntingfield, Lord
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Hurd, Percy A.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Storry-Deans, R.


Hurst, Gerald B.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Strauss, E. A


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Nuttall, Ellis
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Jephcott, A. R.
Oakley, T.
Sugden, Sir Willfrid


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Templeton. W. P.


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Pennefather, Sir John
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Knox, Sir Alfred
Penny, Frederick George
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Lamb, J. Q.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Tinne, J. A.


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Perring, Sir William George
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Bernstaple)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Livingstone, A. M.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Philipson, Mabel
Waddington, R.


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Plicher, G.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Loder, J. de V.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Long, Major Eric
Preston, William
Warrender, Sir Victor


Looker, Herbert William
Price, Major C. W. M.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lougher, Lewis
Radford, E. A.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Raine, Sir Walter
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Ramsden, E.
Watts, Dr. T.


Luce, Maj. -Gen. Sir Richard Herman
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wells, S. R.


Lumley, L. R.
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Renter, J. R.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Remnant, Sir James
Williams, A, M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Rentoul, G. S.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Macintyre, Ian
Rice, Sir Frederick
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


McLean, Major A.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Macmillan, Captain H.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Macquisten, F. A.
Ropner, Major L.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Rye, F. G.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Withers, John James


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Wolmer, Viscount


Malone, Major P. B.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Womersley, W. J.


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Margesson, Captain D.
Sandon, Lord
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Savery, S. S.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Meller, R. J.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Wragg, Herbert


Merriman, F. B.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Shepperson, E. W.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Simms, Dr. John M, (Co. Down)



Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Skelton, A. N.
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Bowyer.


Moore-Brabaron, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Clynes. Rt. Hon. John R.
Groves, T.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Compton, Joseph
Grundy, T. W.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Connolly, M.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Ammon, Charles George
Cove, W. G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Dalton, Hugh
Hardle, George D.


Baker, J. (Wolvernamton, Bilston)
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Harris, Percy A.


Baker, Walter
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hayday, Arthur


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertlllery)
Day, Colonel Harry
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Barnes, A.
Dennison, R.
Hirst, G. H.


Batey, Joseph
Duncan, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Dunnico, H.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Broad, F. A.
Gardner, J. P.
Jenkins, W, (Glamorgan, Neath)


Bromfield, William
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Bromley, J.
Gibbins, Joseph
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Gillett, George M.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Gosling, Harry
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Buchanan, G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Kelly, W. T.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Greenall, T.
Kennedy, T.


Charleton, H. C.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Clowes, S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Kirkwood, D.


Cluse, W. S.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lansbury, George




Lawrence, Susan
Riley, Ben
Thurtle, Ernest


Lawson, John James
Ritson, J.
Townend, A. E.


Lee, F.
Rose, Frank H.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Lindley, F. W.
Saklatvala, Shapurji
Viant, S. P.


Lowth, T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wallhead, Richard C.


Lunn, William
Scrymgeour, E.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Mackinder, W.
Scurr, John
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


MacLaren, Andrew
Sexton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow- Govan)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


March, S.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Maxton, James
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wellock, Wilfred


Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Palsley)
Sitch, Charles H.
Westwood, J.


Montague, Frederick
Smillie, Robert
Whiteley, W.


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Mosley, Oswald
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Murnin, H.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Naylor, T. E.
Snell, Harry
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Oliver, George Harold
Stamford, T. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Palin, John Henry
Stephen, Campbell
Windsor, Walter


Paling, W.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Young Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Sutton, J. E.



Ponsonby, Arthur
Taylor, R. A.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Potts, John S.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)

CLASS VI.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution

reported in respected of Class VI of the Civil Estimates."

The House divided: Ayes, 308; Noes, 144.

Division No. 302.]
AYES.
[11.10 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Fraser, Captain Ian


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fremantie, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Chapman, Sir S.
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Ganzonl, Sir John


Apsley, Lord
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Gates, Percy.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Churchill, Rt. Hon, Winston Spencer
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Gilmour Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Astor, Viscountess
Clarry, Reginald George
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Atkinson, C.
Clayton, G. C.
Goff, Sir Park


Ballour, George (Hampstead)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gower, Sir Robert


Balniel, Lord
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Grace, John


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Grant, Sir J. A.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Colman, N. C. D.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cooper, A. Duff
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Cope, Major William
Guest, Cap. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Bennett, A. J.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Berry, Sir George
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Bethel, A.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Betterton, Henry B.
Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hanbury, C.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Dalkeith, Earl of
Harland, A.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Davidson, J. (Hertt'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Harrison, G. J. C.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset. Yeovil)
Hartington, Marquess of


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Briscoe, Richard George
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Haslam, Henry C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Dixey, A. C.
Hawks, John Anthony


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Drewe, C.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxl'd, Henley)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootie)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Eillis, R. G.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Bullock, Captain M.
Elveden, Viscount.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Burman, J. B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hills, Major John Waller


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hilton, Cecil


Butt, Sir Alfred
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Calne, Gordon Hall
Fermoy, Lord
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Campbell, E. T.
Fielden, E. B.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Cassels, J. D.
Ford, Sir P. J,
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hume, Sir G. H.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Stanley, Lieut-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Huntingfield, Lord
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hurd, Percy A.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'elane)


Hurst, Gerald B.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Storry-Deans, R.


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Nuttail, Ellis
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Jephcott, A. R.
Oakley, T.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Pennefather, Sir John
Templeton, W. P.


Lamb, J. Q.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Perring, Sir William George
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Tinne, J. A.


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Philipson, Mabel
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Pilcher, G.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Loder, J. de V.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Long, Major Eric
Preston, William
Waddington, R.


Looker, Herbert William
Price, Major C. W. M.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Lougher, Lewis
Radford, E. A.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Raine, Sir Walter
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Ramsden, E.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lumley, L. R.
Remer, J. R.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Remnant, Sir James
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Rentoul, G. S.
Watts, Dr. T.


Macintyre, Ian
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wells, S. R.


McLean, Major A.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ta'y)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Macmillan, Captain H.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Macquisten, F. A.
Ropner, Major L.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Rye, F. G.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Salmon, Major I.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Malone, Major P. B.
Sandeman, N. Stewari
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Margesson, Captain D.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Withers, John James


Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Sandon, Lord
Womersley, W. J.


Meller, R. J.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Merriman, F. B.
Savery, S. S.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Shepperson, E. W.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wragg, Herbert


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Skelton, A. N.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Morden, Col. W. Grant
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon



Moreing, Captain A. H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Captain Viscount Curzon and Mr.


Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Smithers, Waldron
Penny


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Dalton, Hugh
Harris, Percy A.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Hayday, Arthur


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hayes, John Henry


Ammon, Charles George
Day, Colonel Harry
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Dennison, R.
Hirst, G. H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Duncan, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Baker, Walter
Dunnico, H.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Edge, Sir William
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Batey, Joseph
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
England, Colonel A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Broad, F. A.
Fenby, T. D.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Bromfield, William
Forrest, W.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Bromley, J.
Gardner, J. P.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Gibbins, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.


Buchanan, G.
Gillett, George M.
Kennedy, T.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Gosling, Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Charleton, H. C.
Greenall, T.
Kirkwood, D.


Clowes, S.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lansbury, George


Cluse, W. S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawrence, Susan


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lawson, John James


Compton, Joseph
Groves, T.
Lee, F.


Connolly, M.
Grundy, T. W.
Lindley, F. W.


Cove, W. G.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Livingstone, A. M.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lowth, T.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Hardle, George D.
Lunn, William


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Saklatvala, Shapurji
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Mackinder, W.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Thurtie, Ernest


MacLaren, Andrew
Scrymgeour, E.
Townend, A. E.


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Scurr, John
Viant, S. P.


March, S.
Sexton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Maxton, James
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Mitchell, E. Rossiyn (Paisley)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Morris, R. H.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Watts-Morgan, Lt-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Mosley, Oswald
Sitch, Charles H.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Murnin, H.
Smillie, Robert
Wellock, Wilfred


Naylor, T. E.
Smith Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhiths)
Westwood, J.


Oliver, George Harold
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Wilkinson Ellen C.


Palin, John Henry
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Paling, W.
Snell, Harry
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Stamford, T. W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Ponsonby, Arthur
Stephen, Campbell
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Potts, John S.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Strauss, E. A
Windsor, Walter


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sutton, J. E.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Riley, Ben
Taylor, R. A.



Ritson, J.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Rose, Frank H.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Mr. Whiteley and Mr. A. Barnes.

CLASS VII.

Question,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class VII of the Civil Estimates.

putt, and agreed to.

CLASS VIII.

Question,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution

reported in respect of Class VIII of the Civil Estimates."

Put, and agreed to.

CLASS IX.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class IX of the Civil Estimates.

The House divided: Ayes, 308; Noes, 138.

Division No. 303.]
AYES.
[11.20 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Drewe, C.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Calne, Gordon Hall
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Campbell, E. T.
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cassels, J. D.
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Applin, Colonel H. V. K.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Ellis, R. G.


Apsley, Lord
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Elveden, Viscount


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
England, Colonel A.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Astor, Viscountess
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Everard W. Lindsay


Atkinson, C.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Chapman, Sir S.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Balniel, Lord
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Falls, Sir Charles F.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Christie, J. A.
Fermoy, Lord


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Fielden, E. B.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Finburgh, S.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Clarry, Reginald George
Ford, Sir P. J.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Clayton, G. C.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Forrest, W.


Bennett, A. J.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Foxcroft Captain C. T.


Berry, Sir George
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Fraser, Captain Ian


Bethel, A.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Colman, N. C. D.
Gadie, Lieut.-Colonel Anthony


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cooper, A. Duff
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Cope, Major William
Ganzonl, Sir John


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gates, Percy


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Goff, Sir Park


Brooklebank, C. E. R.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Gower, Sir Robert


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Crookshank, Cpl. H. (Lindsey. Gainsbro)
Grace, John


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Davidson, J. (Hertt'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)


Bullock, Captain M.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Burman, J. B.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Dixey, A. C.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Hanbury, C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Margesson, Captain D.
Shepperson, E. W.


Harland, A.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Mason, Lieut-Col. Glyn K.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst.)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Meller, R. J.
Skelton, A. N.


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Merriman, F. B.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Haslam, Henry C.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hawke, John Anthony
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Smithers, Waldron


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Morrison, H. (Wills, Salisbury)
Storry-Deans, R.


Hills, Major John Waller
Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Hilton, Cecil
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Ht. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Templeton, W. P.


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Nuttall, Ellis
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Oakley, T.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Hume, Sir G. H.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Tinne, J. A.


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Huntingfield, Lord
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Tryon, Rt. Hon, George Clement


Hurd, Percy A.
Pennefather, Sir John
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Penny, Frederick George
Waddington, R.


Jephcott, A. R.
Percy, Lord, Eustace (Hastings)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Perring, Sir William George
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Kinloch-Cook, Sir Clement
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Knox, Sir Alfred
Philipson, Mabel
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Lamb, J. Q.
Pilcher, G.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Pownail, Sir Assheton
Watts, Dr. T.


Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Preston, William
Wells, S. R.


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Price, Major C. W. M.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Radford, E. A.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Raine, Sir Walter
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Ramsden, E.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Loder, J. de V.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Long, Major Eric
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Looker, Herbert William
Remer, J. R.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lougher, Lewis
Remnant, Sir James
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Rentoul, G. S.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Rice, Sir Frederick
Withers, John James


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Wolmer, Viscount


Lumley, L. R.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Womersley, W. J.


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Ropner, Major L.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W.)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Ray, F. G.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Salmon, Major I.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Macintyre, Ian
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


McLean, Major A.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Wragg, Herbert


Macmillan, Captain H.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sandon, Lord



Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Malone, Major P. B.
Savery, S. S.
Captain Viscount Curzon and Captain




Lord Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Charleton, H. C.
Fenby, T. D.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff. Cannock)
Clowes, S.
Gardner, J. P.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Cluse, W. S.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.


Ammon, Charles George
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Gibbins, Joseph


Attlee, Clement Richard
Compton, Joseph
Gillett, George M.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Connolly, M.
Gosling, Harry


Baker, Walter
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Greenall, T.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Crawfurd, H. E.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)


Batey, Joseph
Dalton, Hugh
Grenfell, D. H. (Glamorgan)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Broad, F. A.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Groves, T.


Bromfield, William
Day, Colonel Harry
Grundy, T. W.


Bromley, J.
Dennison, R.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Duncan, C.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Dunnico, H.
Hardie, George D.


Buchanan, G.
Edge, Sir William
Harris, Percy A.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Hayday, Arthur




Hayes, John Henry
Morris, R. H.
Stamford, T. W.


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Stephen, Campbell


Hirst, G. H.
Mosley, Oswald
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Murnin, H.
Strauss, E. A.


Hudson. J. H. (Huddersfield)
Naylor, T. E.
Sutton, J E.


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Oliver, George Harold
Taylor, R. A.


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Palln, John Henry
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Paling, W.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Thurtle, Ernest


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Potts, John S.
Townend, A. E.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Viant, S. P.


Kelly, W. T.
Riley, Ben
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Kennedy, T.
Ritson, J.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Kenworthy, Lt. -Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Rose, Frank H.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Kirkwood, D.
Saklatvala, Shapurji
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Lansbury, George
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Lawrence, Susan
Scrymgeour, E.
Wellock, Wilfred


Lawson, John James
Scurr, John
Westwood, J.


Lee, F.
Sexton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lindley, F. W.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Livingstone, A. M.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Lowth, T.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lunn, William
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mackinder, W.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


MacLaren, Andrew
Sitch, Charles H.
Windsor, Walter


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Smillie, Robert
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


March, S.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)



Maxton, James
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Mitchell, E. Rossiyn (Paisley)
Snell, Harry
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Whiteley.

NAVY ESTIMATES, 1927.

Question put,
That, this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution

reported in respect of the Navy Estimates."

The House divided: Ayes, 303; Noes, 128.

Division No. 304.]
AYES.
[11.30 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Falls, Sir Charles F.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L' pool, W. Derby)
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fermoy, Lord


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fielden, E. B.


Apsley, Lord
Chapman, Sir S.
Finburgh, S.


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Ford, Sir P. J.


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent. Dover)
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Astor, Viscountess
Christie, J. A.
Forrest, W.


Atkinson, C.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Clarry, Reginald George
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Balniel, Lord
Clayton, G. C.
Fraser, Captain Ian


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fremantie, Lt.-Col. Francis E.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Ganzonl, Sir John


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gates, Percy


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Colman, N. C. D.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cooper, A. Duff
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Bennett, A. J.
Cope, Major William
Goff, Sir Park


Bethel, A.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Gower, Sir Robert


Betterton, Henry B.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Grace, John


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Braitwaite, Major A. N.
Davidson. J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Briscoe, Richard George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hall, Capt. W. D' A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Dixey, A. C.
Hanbury, C.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Drewe, C.
Harland, A.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Edge, Sir William
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)


Bullock, Captain M.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Harrison, G. J. C.


Burman, J. B.
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Hartington, Marquess of


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Ellis, R. G.
Haslam, Henry C.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Elveden, Viscount
Hawke, John Anthony


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
England, Colonel A.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Campbell, E. T.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Cassels, J. D.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Smithers, Waldron


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hills, Major John Waller
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hilton, Cecil
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Storry-Deans, R.


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Strauss, E. A.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Nuttall, Ellis
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Oakley, T.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hume, Sir G. H.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Huntingfield, Lord
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Templeton, W, P.


Hard, Percy A.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Penny, Frederick George
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandswortn, Cen't)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Jephcott, A. R.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Tinne, J. A.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Perring, Sir William George
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Philipson, Mabel
Waddington, R.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Plicher, G.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Lamb, J. Q.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Preston, William
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon, Sir Philip
Price, Major C. W. M.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Radford, E. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Raine, Sir Walter
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Ramsden, E.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Loder, J. de V.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Watts, Dr. T.


Long, Major Eric
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wells, S. R.


Looker, Herbert William
Remer, J. R.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Lougher, Lewis
Remnant, Sir James
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Rentoul. G. S.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Rice, Sir Frederick
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Herman
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Lumley, L. R.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


MacAndrew Major Charles Glen
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Ropner, Major L.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Rye, F. G.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Salmon, Major I.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Macintyre, Ian
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Withers, John James


McLean, Major A.
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Wolmer, Viscount


Macmillan, Captain H.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Womersley, W. J.


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wood. E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sandon, Lord
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W.)


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Savery, S. S.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Malone, Major P. B.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Shepperson, E. W.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Mason, Lieut. Col. Gayn K.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)



Merriman, F. B.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belf'st.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Skelton, A. N.
Captain Viscount Curzon and


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Captain Margesson.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Crawfurd, H. E.
Hayday, Arthur


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dalton, Hugh
Hayes, John Henry


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Hirst, G. H.


Ammon, Charles George
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Day, Colonel Harry
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Dennison, R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Baker, Walter
Duncan, C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Dunnico, H.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Barnes, A.
Fenby, T. D.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Batey, Joseph
Gardner, J. P.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Broad, F. A.
Gibbins, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.


Bromfield, William
Gillett, George M.
Kennedy, T.


Bromley, J.
Gosling, Harry
Kirkwood, D.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Greenall, T.
Lansbury, George


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lawrence, Susan


Buchanan, G.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawson, John James


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lee, F.


Charleton, H. C.
Groves, T.
Lindley, F. W.


Clowes, S.
Grundy, T. W.
Livingstone, A. M


Cluse, W. S.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Lowth, T.


Compton, Joseph
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lunn, William


Connolly, M.
Hardle, George D.
Mackinder, W.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Harris, Percy A.
MacLaren, Andrew




Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Townend, A. E.


March, S.
Scrymgeour, E.
Viant, S. P.


Maxton, James
Scurr, John
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Mitchell, E. Rossiyn (Paisley)
Sexton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Morris, R. H.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Shephered, Arthur Lewis
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Mosley, Oswald
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wellock, Wilfred


Murnin, H.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Westwood, J.


Naylor, T. E.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Whiteley, W.


Oliver, George Harold
Sitch, Charles H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Palin, John Henry
Smillie, Robert
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Paling, W.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Ponsonby, Arthur
Stamford, T. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Potts, John S.
Stephen, Campbell
Windsor, Walter


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sutton, J. E.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Riley, Ben
Taylor, R. A.



Ritson, J.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Rose, Frank H.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr.


Saklatvala, Shapurji
Thurtie, Ernest
Charles Edwards.

ARMY ESTIMATES, 1927.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution

reported in respect of the Army Estimates (including Ordnance Factories Estimate)."

The House divided: Ayes, 290; Noes, 125.

Division No. 305.]
AYES.
[11.40 p.m.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Colman, N. C. D.
Haslam, Henry C.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'Pool, W. Derby)
Cooper, A. Duff
Hawke, John Anthony


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cope, Major William
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Apsley, Lord
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Isllington, N.)
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Astor, Viscountess
Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Atkinson, C.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Balniel, Lord
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hills, Major John Waller


Barclay- Harvey, C. M.
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempset'd)
Hilton, Cecil


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Dixey, A. C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Bennett, A. J.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Bethel, A.
Edge, Sir William
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Betterton, Henry B.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Ellis, R. G.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney N.)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Elveden, Viscount
Hudson, R. S. (Cumb'l'nd Whith'n)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
England, Colonel A.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Blades, Captain Robert Croft
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Huntingfield, Lord


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hurd, Percy A.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Briscoe, Richard George
Falle, Sri Bertram G.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brittain, Sri Harry
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fermoy, Lord
Jephcott, A. R.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Fielden, E. B.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Finburgh, S.
Kidd, J. (Linllthgow)


Brown, Brig-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Ford, Sir P. J.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Bullock, Captain M.
Forrest, W.
Lamb, J. Q.


Burman, J. B.
Forrest, Sir Harry S.
Lane, Fox. Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fraser, Captain Ian
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Butt, Sir Alfred
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Campbell, E. T.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Loder, J. de V


Cassels, J. D.
Ganzonl, Sir John
Long, Major Eric


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gates, Percy
Looker, Herbert William


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Lougher, Lewis


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lowe, Sir Francis William


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Goff, Sir Park
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gower, Sir Robert
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Lumley, L. R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
MacAndrew Major Charles Glen


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Christie, J. A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Macintyre, Ian


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
McLean, Major A.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hall, Capt, W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Macmillan, Captain H.


Clayton, G. C.
Hanbury, C.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Harland, A.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Harrison, G. J. C.



Malone, Major P. B.
Remer, J. R.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Remnant, Sir James
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Margesson, Captain D.
Rentoul, G. S.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Tinne, J. A.


Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Merriman, F. B.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. H. (Ayr)
Ropner, Major L.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Rye, F. G.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Morden, Col. W. Grant
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Watson, Ht. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandon, Lord
Watts, Dr. T.


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wells, S. R.


Newman, sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Savery, S. S.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Shaw. R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Shepperson, E. W.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Nuttall, Ellis
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Oakley, T.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belf'st.)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Pennefather, Sir John
Smithers, Waldron
Wise, Sir Fredric


Penny, Frederick George
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Withers, John James


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Wolmer, Viscount


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Womersley W. J


Peering, Sir William George
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich W.)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Storry-Deans, R.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Philipson, Mabel
Strauss, E. A.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Pilcher, G
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Wragg, Herbert


Preston, William
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Price, Major C. W. M.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Radford, E. A.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid



Raine, Sir Walter
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES. —


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Templeton, W. P.
Major Sir Harry Barnston and


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Captain Viscount Curzon.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Riley, Ben


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Ritson, J.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardle, George D.
Rose, Frank H.


Ammon, Charles George
Harris, Percy A.
Sakiatvala, Shapurji


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayday, Arthur
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hayes, John Henry
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, Walter
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sexton, James


Barnes, A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Batey, Joseph
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Bromfield, William
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bromley, J.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sitch, Charles H.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smillie, Robert


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Buchanan. G.
Kennedy, T.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Clowes, S.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Cluse, W. S.
Lawson, John James
Taylor, R. A.


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Connolly, M.
Lindley, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Livingstone, A. M.
Townend, A. E.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Dalton, Hugh
Lunn, William
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Day, Colonel Harry
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Dennison, R.
March, S.
Wellock, Wilfred


Duncan, C.
Maxton, James
Westwood, J


Dunnico, H.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Whiteley, W.


Fenby, T. D.
Morris, R. H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gardner, J. P.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Mosley, Oswald
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Gibbins, Joseph
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Gillett, George M.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry
Windsor, Walter


Greenall, T.
Paling, W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


Grundy, T. W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

AIR ESTIMATES, 1927.

Question put,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution

reported in respect of the Air Force Estimates."

The House divided: Ayes, 294; Noes, 117.

Division No. 306.]
AYES.
[11.50 p.m.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool. W. Derby)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lamb, J. Q.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Ellis, R. G.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Apsley, Lord
Elveden, Viscount
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon, Sir Philip


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
England, Colonel A.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lloyd Cyril E. (Dudley)


Astor, Viscountess
Everard, W. Lindsay
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Atkinson, C.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Loder, J. de V.


Balniel, Lord
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Long, Major Eric


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Fenby, T. D.
Looker, Herbert William


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Fermoy, Lord
Lougher, Lewis


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Fielden, E. B.
Lowe, Sir Francis William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Finburgh, S.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Lumley, L. R.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Forrest, W.
MacAndrew Major Charles Glen


Bennett, A. J,
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Bethel, A.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Betterton, Henry B.
Fraser, Captain Ian
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Fremantie, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macintyre, Ian


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
McLean, Major A.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Ganzoni, Sir John
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Gates, Percy
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Briscoe, Richard George
Goff, Sir Park
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Gower, Sir Robert
Malone, Major P. B.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Grace, John
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Margesson, Captain D.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.


Burman, J. B.
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E, (Bristol, N.)
Merriman, F. B.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Campbell, E. T.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Cassels, J. D.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hanbury, C.
Morden, Col. W. Grant


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Moreing, Captain A. H.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Harland, A.
Murchison, Sir Kenneth


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Harrison, G. J. C.
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hartington, Marquess of
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Chapman, Sir S.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Haslam, Henry C.
Nicholson O. (Westminster)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hawke, John Anthony
Nield, Ht. Hon. Sir Herbert


Christie, J. A.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Nuttall, Ellis


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Oakley, T.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Clarry, Reginald George
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Clayton, G. C.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Pennefather, Sir John


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Hills, Major John Waller
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Cohen, Major J. Brunei
Hilton, Cecil
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Perring, Sir William George


Colman, N. C. D.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Cooper, A. Duff
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cope, Major William
Hopkins. J. W. W.
Philipson, Mabel


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Pilcher, G.


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn., N.)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Crawfurd, H. E.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Preston, William


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Radford, E. A.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Raine, Sir Walter


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Ramsden. E.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Huntingfield, Lord
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hurd, Percy A.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Remer, J. R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Remnant, Sir James


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Jephcott, A. R.
Rentoul, G. S.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Dixey, A. C.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. H.
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Edge, Sir William
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)


Ropner, Major L.
Storry-Deans, R.
Wells, S. R.


Rye, F. G.
Strauss, E. A.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple-


Sandeman, N. Stewart
Stuart, Crichton., Lord C.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Sandon, Lord
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Templeton, W. P.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Savery, S. S.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Shepperson, E. W.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Withers, John James


Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Tinne, J. A.
Wolmer, Viscount


Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belf'st.)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Womersley, W. J.


Skelton, A. N.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, C.
Wallace, Captain D. E.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Smithers, Waldron
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Wragg, Herbert


Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Warrender, Sir Victor
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)



Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Watts, Dr. T.
Captain Viscount Curzon and




Mr. Penny.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Riley, Ben


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Ritson, J.


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Waiter
Hirst, G. H.
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Scurr, John


Barnes, A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sexton, James


Batey, Joseph
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Bromfield, William
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Bromley, J.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smillie, Robert


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Buchanan, G.
Kennedy, T.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Clowes, S.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Cluse, W. S.
Lawson, John James
Taylor, R. A.


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Connolly, M.
Lindley, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Livingstone, A. M.
Townend, A. E.


Dalton, Hugh
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lunn, William
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
MacLaren, Andrew
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dennison, R.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Duncan, C.
Maxton, James
Wellock, Wilfred


Dunnico, H.
Mitchell, E. Rossiyn (Paisley)
Westwood, J.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Morris, R. H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gardner. J. P.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Gibbins, Joseph
Mosley, Oswald
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Gillett, George M.
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Gosling, Harry
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Palin, John Henry
Windsor, Walter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Groves, T.
Ponsonby, Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Potts, John S.
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Whiteley.


Question put, and agreed to.

REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1927.

Question,
That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Revenue Departments Estimates.

put, and agreed to.

WAYS AND MEANS [26TH JULY].

Resolution reported,
That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, the sum of £252,231,958 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.

Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by the Chairman of Ways and Means, Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Ronald McNeill.

CONSOLIDATION FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL,

"to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-eight, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this Session of Parliament," presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 192.]

CROWN LANDS (No. 2) BILL.

Order read for consideration of Lords Amendment.

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): I beg to move, "That the Lords Amendment be now considered."

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: We must protest against this being taken now.

Mr. SPEAKER: It is only a drafting Amendment.

Lords Amendment considered accordingly.

Lords Amendment:

In Title, leave out "London and Gloucester Diocesan Boards of Finance, respectively" and insert "Gloucester Diocesan Board of Finance."

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Mr. KELLY: How is it that this business is not on the Order Paper? Hon. Members did not know that this Bill was to be considered.

Mr. GUINNESS: This Amendment is merely to make the Title of the Bill conform to an Amendment embodied in the Bill at the instance of hon. Members opposite, that Clause 19 be dropped.

Mr. KELLY: That may be so, but hon. Members ought to have been informed, so that they would know that the business was coming on.

Mr. SPEAKER: It is my duty to examine Amendments, to see whether there is any substance in them. This is only an Amendment of the Title to conform to an Amendment which was suggested from this House.

ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACTS.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1926, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the burghs of Girvan, Maybole, and Largs, in the county of Ayr, and for other purposes, which was presented on the 23rd day of June 1927, be approved."—[Colonel Ashley.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Wednesday evening, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at three minutes after Twelve o'clock.